To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Generative-transformational grammar.
Journal articles on the topic 'Generative-transformational grammar'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Generative-transformational grammar.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
البار, ابتهال محمد. "تعليم النحو العربي لغير الناطقين بالعربية على ضوء نظرية تشومسكي." Al-Ma‘rifah 15, no. 1 (April 20, 2018): 57–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.21009/almakrifah.15.01.04.
Full textAbstract:
This research aims to study the concept of transformational-generative grammar by Noam Chomsky as well as the foundation of this theory and its actional principles in terms of language acquisition, and try to use the theoretical data in teaching Arabic grammar to non-native Arabic speakers. This can be done by using the analytical descriptive approach. This research is considered important because it deals with a modern linguistic theory which has a scientific value in the modern language lesson and employs it in the field of teaching Arabic grammar. The study has benefited from data of the transformational-generative grammar in the case of coping with teaching the rules of Arabic grammar to answer fundamental questions, which are: what are the foundations of transformational-generative grammar theory? What are the rules of transformational in Arabic grammar? What are the benefits of the transformational-generative grammar theory non-native Arabic speakers? The research concluded that the conscious practice of language takes place from a constructional point of view within the meaning and not just to the practical. Second language learner must be familiar with the vocal, and grammatical system in order to be able to practice the language with its rules. Finally, the aim is not to limit the linguistic attitudes in the educational process; as the generative grammar believes that a person has a tremendous ability to produce unlimited linguistic patterns of limited linguistic elements.
2
SCHOLZ, BARBARA C., and GEOFFREY K. PULLUM. "Tracking the origins of transformational generative grammar." Journal of Linguistics 43, no. 3 (October 22, 2007): 701–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022226707004823.
Full text
3
Seuren, Pieter. "Concerning the Roots of Transformational Generative Grammar." Historiographia Linguistica 36, no. 1 (April 6, 2009): 97–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hl.36.1.05seu.
Full text
4
Bagha, Karim Nazari. "Generative Grammar (GG)." Management and Labour Studies 34, no. 2 (May 2009): 291–304. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0258042x0903400208.
Full textAbstract:
This article consists of eight parts: introduction, the organization of a Generative Grammar, operation of the system of base rules, deep structure, surface structure and transformational rules, standard theory, extended standard theory, revised extended standard theory, and minimalism. According to Chomsky, the grammar of a language establishes a relationship between sound and meaning, i.e., between phonetic representation and semantic representation. To discover this grammar is the primary goal of linguistics. One of Chomsky's attempts to accomplish this goal is the standard theory grammar, which has been outlined in the article. We note that the grammar consists of three distinct components: the syntactic component, which consists of a Lexicon and two types of syntactic rules, the Base and the Transformational, the phonological component which consists of phonological rules, and the semantic component, which consists of Semantic rules.
5
Nevin, Bruce E. "More Concerning the Roots of Transformational Generative Grammar." Historiographia Linguistica International Journal for the History of the Language Sciences 36, no. 2-3 (2009): 459–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hl.36.2-3.21nev.
Full text
6
Nevin, Bruce E. "More Concerning the Roots of Transformational Generative Grammar." Quot homines tot artes: New Studies in Missionary Linguistics 36, no. 2-3 (December 1, 2009): 459–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hl.36.2.21nev.
Full text
7
BENNETT, T. J. A. "SELF-ORGANIZING SYSTEMS AND TRANSFORMATIONAL-GENERATIVE (TG) GRAMMAR." Cybernetics and Systems 19, no. 1 (January 1988): 61–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01969728808902156.
Full text
8
Hendrick, R. "Formal versus explanatory generalizations in generative transformational grammar." Lingua 69, no. 1-2 (June 1986): 165–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(86)90082-3.
Full text
9
Christidis, A. Ph. "On generativity: Theory and pre-theory in transformational generative grammar." Lingua 66, no. 2-3 (July 1985): 201–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0024-3841(85)90325-0.
Full text
10
Edelman, Shimon. "Generative grammar with a human face?" Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26, no. 6 (December 2003): 675–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x03300159.
Full textAbstract:
The theoretical debate in linguistics during the past half-century bears an uncanny parallel to the politics of the (now defunct) Communist Bloc. The parallels are not so much in the revolutionary nature of Chomsky's ideas as in the Bolshevik manner of his takeover of linguistics (Koerner 1994) and in the Trotskyist (“permanent revolution”) flavor of the subsequent development of the doctrine of Transformational Generative Grammar (TGG) (Townsend & Bever 2001, pp. 37–40). By those standards, Jackendoff is quite a party faithful (a Khrushchev or a Dubcek, rather than a Solzhenitsyn or a Sakharov) who questions some of the components of the dogma, yet stops far short of repudiating it.
11
Ney, James W. "On generativity." Historiographia Linguistica 20, no. 2-3 (January 1, 1993): 341–454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hl.20.2-3.08ney.
Full textAbstract:
Summary Chomsky insists that he has always understood a generative grammar to be “nothing more than an explicit grammar”. Other commentators have understood that ‘generate’ means ‘specify an infinite set’ and that a ‘generative’ grammar is a grammar which specifies an infinite set of sentences. This understanding of the term ‘generative’ has had a long and interesting history within the confines of linguistic theory starting in the writings of Chomsky’s intellectual predecessors and continuing through the writings of Chomsky himself. In some cases, it even seems that ‘to generate’ is a near synonym for ‘to produce’ both in the writings of Chomsky and of other early transformationalists. In other instances, it is difficult to see how ‘explicit’, an adjective, can serve as a synonym for ‘generate’, a verb as this verb has been used throughout the history of transformational generative linguistics. Furthermore, it would appear that a rule like move-α has little or no meaning in a non-generative grammar, i.e., one that is merely ‘explicit’, one that does not rely on process type statements as its modus operandi. Nevertheless, in the recent history of transformationalism, Chomsky insists that ‘generative’ means nothing more than ‘explicit’ and nothing less. To him, the notion that ‘generative’ has something to do with specifying or characterizing a set of sentences is a notion that never was.
12
Jacobsen, Bent. "The Origin and Rationale of X-bar Syntax." HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business 6, no. 10 (July 29, 2015): 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v6i10.21517.
Full textAbstract:
The present paper is intended as a reasonably elementary introduction to the nature of X-bar syntax, an important module in the structure of a modern transformational-generative grammar. The examples have been taken from English; however, since X-bar syntax is an integral part of the overall structure of Universal Grammar, the analyses presented here extend to any language.
13
Henkel, Jacqueline. "Linguistic Models and Recent Criticism: Transformational-Generative Grammar as Literary Metaphor." PMLA 105, no. 3 (May 1990): 448. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/462894.
Full text
14
Newmeyer, Frederick J. "The Reception of Early Transformational Grammar in Europe." Cadernos de Linguística 2, no. 1 (January 13, 2021): 01–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.25189/2675-4916.2021.v2.n1.id285.
Full textAbstract:
The early success in the United States of Chomsky’s book Syntactic Structures and the theory of transformational-generative grammar that it introduced raises the question of the reception of the theory in other countries. Looking at Europe, there is no overarching generalisation. In some countries (the UK, the Netherlands) the theory enjoyed a great success, in others a moderate success, at least for a time (France, Germany), and in other countries very little success (Italy, Spain). Nevertheless, there is widespread agreement that European contributions to the theory have been among the most important.
15
Adha, Ruly. "EMPTY CATEGORIES IN TRANSFORMATIONAL RULES." JL3T ( Journal of Linguistics Literature and Language Teaching) 5, no. 1 (August 16, 2019): 66–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.32505/jl3t.v5i1.887.
Full textAbstract:
There are three theories that are always developed in any study of language, namely theory of language structure, theory of language acquisition, and theory of language use. Among those three theories, theory of language structure is regarded as the most important one. It is assumed that if someone knows the structure of language, he/she can develop theories about how language is acquired and used. It makes Chomsky interested in developing the theory of language structure. Chomsky introduced a theory of grammar called Transformational Generative Grammar or Transformational Syntax. Transformational Syntax is a method of sentence fomation which applies some syntactic rules (or also called transformational rules). Transformational rules consist of three types, namely movement transformation, deletion transformation, and substitution transformation. When those transformational rules are applied in a sentence, they will leave empty categories. Empty categories can be in the form of Complementizer (Comp), Trace, and PRO. This article will elaborate those empty categories; their appearance in the transformational rules; and the characteristics of each empty category.
16
Seuren, Pieter. "Essentials of Semantic Syntax." Cadernos de Linguística 2, no. 1 (January 28, 2021): 01–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.25189/2675-4916.2021.v2.n1.id290.
Full textAbstract:
Semantic Syntax (SeSyn), originally called Generative Semantics, is an offshoot of Chomskyan generative grammar (ChoGG), rejected by Chomsky and his school in the late 1960s. SeSyn is the theory of algorithmical grammars producing the well-formed sentences of a language L from the corresponding semantic input, the Semantic Analysis (SA), represented as a traditional tree structure diagram in a specific formal language of incremental predicate logic with quantifying and qualifying operators (including the truth functions), and with all lexical items filled in. A SeSyn-type grammar is thus by definition transformational, but not generative. The SA originates in cognition in a manner that is still largely mysterious, but its actual form can be distilled from the Surface Structure (SS) of the sentences of L following the principles set out in SeSyn. In this presentation we provide a more or less technical résumé of the SeSyn theory. A comparison is made with ChoGG-type grammars, which are rejected on account of their intrinsic unsuitability as a cognitive-realist grammar model. The ChoGG model follows the pattern of a 1930s neopositivist Carnap-type grammar for formal logical languages. Such grammars are random sentence generators, whereas, obviously, (nonpathological) humans are not. A ChoGG-type grammar is fundamentally irreconcilable with a mentalist-realist theory of grammar. The body of the paper consists in a demonstration of the production of an English and a French sentence, the latter containing a classic instance of the cyclic rule of Predicate Raising (PR), essential in the general theory of clausal complementation yet steadfastly repudiated in ChoGG for reasons that have never been clarified. The processes and categories defined in SeSyn are effortlessly recognised in languages all over the world, whether indigenous or languages of a dominant culture—taking into account language-specific values for the general theoretical parameters involved. This property makes SeSyn particularly relevant for linguistic typology, which now ranks as the most promising branch of linguistics but has so far conspicuously lacked an adequate theoretical basis.
17
Bolta, Marija. "The subject to subject raising rule in Slovene." Linguistica 25, no. 2 (December 1, 1985): 95–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/linguistica.25.2.95-110.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of the present article is to present evidence in support of the claim that the rule which promotes the subject NP of the embedded subject clause to the position of the ma trix subject (subject raising, SSR)is a viable rule in Slo vene transformational generative grammar.
18
Alsubaiai, Hanan Sarhan. "The Correlation between Old and New Linguistic Paradigms: A Literature Review Based on Kuhn’s School of Thoughts." English Language Teaching 14, no. 10 (September 26, 2021): 84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v14n10p84.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to assess the evidence regarding the relationship between previous and new schools of linguistics. According to Kuhn (1970), old linguistic paradigms incorporate vocabulary and apparatus from previous or traditional paradigms. In particular, this review addresses the Question: Do new paradigms in linguistic arise from old or previous ones, as Kuhn suggested? The study is significant in understanding emerging schools of linguistics based on previous ones. A qualitative literature review was applied to compare new and old schools of linguistics. According to the findings, there is substantial evidence that functionalism, structuralism, and Transformational-Generative Grammar support Kuhn's argument. Most notably, the changes of the transformational-generative grammar from a consistent and straightforward Standard Theory to an improved Extended Standard Theory, and finally, to the Minimalist Program, point towards the same conclusion. Interestingly, the transformations demonstrate how new paradigms arise from old paradigms without borrowing many concepts, terms, and experiments from them. This study draws the attention of linguists in the 21st Century to pay closer attention to the trends in schools of linguistics.
19
Hildebrand, Joyce. "The Acquisition of Preposition Stranding." Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 32, no. 1 (1987): 65–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008413100012020.
Full textAbstract:
This study examines the acquisition of a familiar and widely studied syntactic phenomenon, preposition stranding, within the framework of transformational generative grammar. According to Chomsky’s theory of Universal Grammar (UG), children begin the acquisition task with an innate knowledge of universal principles of grammar. Many of these principles have open parameters with marked and unmarked options which must be set by children on the basis of their linguistic input. The marked setting entails the unmarked setting in that if a language allows the marked structures it will also allow the relevant unmarked structures, but the reverse is not necessarily true.
20
Platzack, Christer. "A Survey of Generative Analyses of the Verb Second Phenomenon in Germanic." Nordic Journal of Linguistics 8, no. 1 (June 1985): 49–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0332586500001256.
Full textAbstract:
This paper reviews various approaches to describe the verb second phenomenon of Germanic languages within generative transformational grammar. The solution to the descriptive problem seems to be to assume that the finite verb in main clauses has the same position as the complementizer in subordinate clauses. Various ways to explain the presence of this word order in Germanic languages are presented in the final part of the paper.
21
MORATO-MALEKE, ʼMATŠITSO EUGENIA, and LEHLOHONOLO SAMUEL PHAFOLI. "The Use of Nominal Subordinate Clause as a Syntactic Complexity Measure by Some National University of Lesotho Students." International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation 3, no. 11 (November 30, 2020): 177–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2020.3.11.17.
Full textAbstract:
The paper explores the use of nominal subordinate clause as a syntactic complexity measure in some examination scripts of the National University of Lesotho (NUL) fourth year students. The study is based on the employment of the interpretivist paradigm as well as descriptive and case study designs. Data was collected from the students’ essays in the (2016/2017) examination papers and analysed qualitatively, following the Transformational Generative Grammar (TGG) and the Cognitive Grammar (CG), both of which formed the theoretical frameworks for the study. The paper shows that NUL students have a reasonably high level of syntactic complexity with the use of nominal subordinate clause.
22
Newmeyer, Frederick J. "Competence vs. performance; theoretical vs. applied." Historiographia Linguistica 17, no. 1-2 (January 1, 1990): 167–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hl.17.1-2.13new.
Full textAbstract:
Summary The past 30 years have seen marked shifts in the generative grammarians’ view of the nature of linguistic competence. The rule-oriented period of early Transformational Grammar, which was ushered in by the publication of Chomsky’s Syntactic Structures in 1957, gave way a decade later to the principle-oriented period of Generative Semantics. By the mid-1970s, the rule-oriented Lexicalist framework had replaced Generative Semantics. Since around 1981, the principle-oriented Principles & Parameters approach is the one to which a majority of generative syntacticians hold allegiance. Each shift in the generativists’ view of the nature of competence has been accompanied by a revised view of how concepts derived from generative syntax might be applied to second language teaching. Since 1957, three different strategies for applying the theory have been propounded: the ‘mechanical’, the ‘terminological’, and the ‘implicational’, each of which has been instantiated during each period in the development of generative syntax. The paper closes with some speculative remarks about the feasibility of applying generativist theory to second language teaching.
23
Khasanah, Noor. "Transformational Linguistics and the Implication Towards Second Language Learning." Register Journal 3, no. 1 (July 1, 2016): 23. http://dx.doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v3i1.23-36.
Full textAbstract:
The essence of Chomsky’s approach to language is the claim that there are linguistic universals in domain of syntax. He felt confident to show that syntax can be defined for any given language. For Chomsky, the nature of such mental representations is largely innate, so if a grammatical theory has explanatory adequacy it must be able to explain the various grammatical nuances of the languages of the world as relatively minor variations in the universal pattern of human language. In teaching English as L2, therefore knowing syntax and grammar of the language is important. Transformational Generative Grammar gives adequate elaboration in understanding them. Thus, the learners are expected to be able to avoid such ambiguity in interpreting the deep structure of a sentence since ambiguity will lead other people as the listeners or hearers of the speakers to misinterpret either consciously or unconsciously. Keywords: Surface Structure; Deep Structure; Constituent; Transformation
24
Lasnik, Howard. "Syntactic Structures: formal considerations 60 years later." Revista Linguíʃtica 13, no. 2 (September 1, 2017): 35. http://dx.doi.org/10.31513/linguistica.2017.v13n2a14026.
Full textAbstract:
Chomsky (1955), The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory (henceforth LSLT), laid out in great detail the formal foundations for a rigorous new way of looking at language scientifcally, transformational generative grammar. This awesome accomplishment was announced to the world in Chomsky (1957), Syntactic Structures (henceforth SS), a publication that revolutionized the feld, or really, created a new feld. Needless to say, syntactic theory has undergone vast changes since then, but certain fundamental ideas, and even a few technical details, persist. In this article, I will briefly discuss some instances of each sort.
25
Touqir, Sonia, Amna Mushtaq, and Touqir Nasir. "Chomsky's Contribution to Linguistics: A Review." Global Anthropological Studies Review I, no. I (December 30, 2018): 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gasr.2018(i-i).01.
Full textAbstract:
This review seeks to highlight Chomsky's major contributions to the field of linguistics. He changed linguists' conception about the nature of language from an externalized to internalized approach. This shift also resulted in the language being thought of as a cognitive phenomenon rather than as a set of structures to be analyzed for their correctness or incorrectness to prove his stance introduced the concept of language faculty, its workings, Universal Grammar, Principles and Parameters, and Transformational and Generative Grammar. The TGG also significantly overhauled the existent phrase structure rules. These rules were brought to follow binarity principles that dictated that a node cannot have less than or more than two branches. Besides the concept of Universal Grammar, along with its principles and parameters, Chomsky simplified how the language acquisition process can be understood: instead of learning hundreds of rules, the human mind has to install a handful of principles and parameters.
26
Qadir, Abubakir Omar. "شرۆڤەكردنى ڕستەى زمانى كوردى لە ڕوانگەى تيۆرى دەسەڵات و بەستنەوەدا." Journal of University of Human Development 3, no. 4 (December 31, 2017): 128. http://dx.doi.org/10.21928/juhd.v3n4y2017.pp128-158.
Full textAbstract:
This study tries to analyze the Kurdish language, using Chomsky’s (1981) Government Binding theory, which is by itself regarded as a turning point in Chomsky’s Transformational Generative Grammar related to Universal Grammar. This approach will answer the diversity occurs in different languages according to Principles and Parameters.
First, Universal Grammar and its principles have been mentioned in this study. Later on, interpretations are given to the sub-theories of GB with which sentences in central Kurdish are analyzed. Besides, the level and method of the theory a long with the optional and obligatory movements are shown. Interpretations are given to different cases of noun phrase. The difference between grammatical case and theta role is indicated through examples.Again, indicating economy in expression, movement and null-constituents whose places can be filled by PRO/ pro are discussed. The distribution of pronouns to personal and demonstrative which refer back to the empty categories reveals the activeness of Kurdish as a pro-drop language.
27
Abdel-Malek, Zaki N. "The Morphophonemics of Weak Triliteral Stems in Standard Arabic: A Generative Phonology Perspective." Al Abhath 68, no. 1 (December 30, 2020): 182–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2589997x-06801007.
Full textAbstract:
The “weak” triliteral stems of Standard Arabic have been studied in considerable detail by Arab as well as Western grammarians. In most cases, however, the treatment has been largely limited to listing and classifying the primary data, which satisfies observational adequacy but fails to meet the essential requirements of descriptive adequacy, simplicity and generality. In a few cases rules have been proposed, but these rules fall short of expectations: on the whole, they strike the user as complex, arbitrary and unmotivated. Drawing on the theory of Generative-Transformational Grammar, I have formulated a small set of rules which seek to satisfy all of the three essential requirements, and thus render the subject more palatable to scholars as well as learners of Standard Arabic.
28
Abdel-Malek, Zaki N. "The Morphophonemics of Weak Triliteral Stems in Standard Arabic: A Generative Phonology Perspective." Al Abhath 68, no. 1 (December 30, 2020): 182–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/18115586-00680106.
Full textAbstract:
The “weak” triliteral stems of Standard Arabic have been studied in considerable detail by Arab as well as Western grammarians. In most cases, however, the treatment has been largely limited to listing and classifying the primary data, which satisfies observational adequacy but fails to meet the essential requirements of descriptive adequacy, simplicity and generality. In a few cases rules have been proposed, but these rules fall short of expectations: on the whole, they strike the user as complex, arbitrary and unmotivated. Drawing on the theory of Generative-Transformational Grammar, I have formulated a small set of rules which seek to satisfy all of the three essential requirements, and thus render the subject more palatable to scholars as well as learners of Standard Arabic.
29
Ochmańska, Katarzyna. "From de Saussure to a cartographic approach – the creation and continuation of the reflection of transformational-generative grammar." Colloquia Germanica Stetinensia 27 (2018): 149–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.18276/cgs.2018.27-09.
Full text
30
Anderson, John M. "Structuralism and Autonomy: From Saussure to Chomsky." Historiographia Linguistica International Journal for the History of the Language Sciences 32, no. 1-2 (2005): 117–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hl.32.1-2.06and.
Full textAbstract:
Structuralism sought to introduce various kinds of autonomy into the study of language, including the autonomy of that study itself. The basis for this was the insistence on categorial autonomy, whereby categories are identified language-internally (whether in a particular language or in language generally). In relation to phonology, categorial autonomy has generally been tempered by grounding: the categories correlate (at least prototypically) with substance, phonetic properties. This is manifested in the idea of ‘natural classes’ in generative phonology, for instance. Usually, however, and particularly since Bloomfield, no such grounding (in meaning) has been attributed to syntax. This attitude culminates in the principle of the autonomy of syntax which was put forward in transformational-generative grammar. Such an attitude can be contrasted not merely with most pre-structural linguistics but also, in its severity, with other developments in structuralism. In present-day terms, the groundedness of syntax assumes that only the behaviour of semantically typical members of a category determines its basic syntax, and this syntax reflects the semantic properties; groundedness filters out potential syntactic analyses that are incompatible with this.
31
Anderson, John M. "Structuralism and Autonomy." Historiographia Linguistica 32, no. 1-2 (June 8, 2005): 117–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hl.32.2.06and.
Full textAbstract:
Summary Structuralism sought to introduce various kinds of autonomy into the study of language, including the autonomy of that study itself. The basis for this was the insistence on categorial autonomy, whereby categories are identified language-internally (whether in a particular language or in language generally). In relation to phonology, categorial autonomy has generally been tempered by grounding: the categories correlate (at least prototypically) with substance, phonetic properties. This is manifested in the idea of ‘natural classes’ in generative phonology, for instance. Usually, however, and particularly since Bloomfield, no such grounding (in meaning) has been attributed to syntax. This attitude culminates in the principle of the autonomy of syntax which was put forward in transformational-generative grammar. Such an attitude can be contrasted not merely with most pre-structural linguistics but also, in its severity, with other developments in structuralism. In present-day terms, the groundedness of syntax assumes that only the behaviour of semantically typical members of a category determines its basic syntax, and this syntax reflects the semantic properties; groundedness filters out potential syntactic analyses that are incompatible with this.
32
Efrizah, Doni. "Thematic Roles in the Tale of "Macbeth" by E.F. Dodd." Jurnal Humaniora Teknologi 5, no. 2 (November 14, 2019): 8–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.34128/jht.v5i2.57.
Full textAbstract:
The research deals with predicates and arguments in the theoretical framework of Transformational Generative Grammar in terms of Thematic Roles or Theta Roles proposed by Chomsky (1981), Haegeman (1994) and his followers Radford (1981) and Ouhalla (1999).
Thematic Roles may be defined as the participants of the arguments of a clause. It means that Thematic roles refer to the relationship between verbs and their arguments. Thematic Roles is focused to eight types of theta role. They are agent, patient, theme, experiencer, beneficiary/ benefactive, goal, Source and location. The analysis of Thematic Roles is taken form tne tale of “Macbeth” by E.F, Dodd in six tales of Shakespear. The result shows that agent is the biggest thematic roles found in the tale of Macbeth and source is the lowest one.
Keywords: Thematic Roles, Verbs, Arguments
33
Jiang, Yicun. "On a Chomskyan postulation in conceptual metaphor theory." Chinese Semiotic Studies 17, no. 3 (August 1, 2021): 355–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/css-2021-2002.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper is an attempt to make a comparison between Lakoff and Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory and Chomsky’s transformational generative grammar, and to demonstrate a Chomskyan postulation in the former. Although Lakoff and Johnson regard Chomsky’s linguistics as a modern representative of traditional Western philosophies of language that tend to highlight the a priori assumptions rather than empirical findings, the cognitive theory of metaphor contains a Chomskyan metaphysical assumption as its most important notion, i.e. the assumption of conceptual metaphors. Thus, what the present paper wants to argue with ample evidence is that Lakoff and Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory resembles Chomsky’s logic and that their notion of conceptual metaphors is very much a Chomskyan postulation. What the present study tries to further demonstrate is that the abovementioned two theories actually have many points in common, which also implies that Lakoff and Johnson have failed to avoid the paradigm that they believe is conflicting with their own.
34
SAG, IVAN A., RUI P. CHAVES, ANNE ABEILLÉ, BRUNO ESTIGARRIBIA, DAN FLICKINGER, PAUL KAY, LAURA A. MICHAELIS, et al. "Lessons from the English auxiliary system." Journal of Linguistics 56, no. 1 (January 3, 2019): 87–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s002222671800052x.
Full textAbstract:
The English auxiliary system exhibits many lexical exceptions and subregularities, and considerable dialectal variation, all of which are frequently omitted from generative analyses and discussions. This paper presents a detailed, movement-free account of the English Auxiliary System within Sign-Based Construction Grammar (Sag 2010, Michaelis 2011, Boas & Sag 2012) that utilizes techniques of lexicalist and construction-based analysis. The resulting conception of linguistic knowledge involves constraints that license hierarchical structures directly (as in context-free grammar), rather than by appeal to mappings over such structures. This allows English auxiliaries to be modeled as a class of verbs whose behavior is governed by general and class-specific constraints. Central to this account is a novel use of the featureaux, which is set both constructionally and lexically, allowing for a complex interplay between various grammatical constraints that captures a wide range of exceptional patterns, most notably the vexing distribution of unstresseddo, and the fact that Ellipsis can interact with other aspects of the analysis to produce the feeding and blocking relations that are needed to generate the complex facts of EAS. The present approach, superior both descriptively and theoretically to existing transformational approaches, also serves to undermine views of the biology of language and acquisition such as Berwick et al. (2011), which are centered on mappings that manipulate hierarchical phrase structures in a structure-dependent fashion.
35
Chukwudi, Iwuala, Zebulon, and Imu, Famous Oghoghophia. "Negation in Languages: A Urhobo Perspective." Journal of Language Teaching and Research 12, no. 3 (May 1, 2021): 437–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1203.14.
Full textAbstract:
This paper examines negation and types of tense negation in Urhobo. It also identifies negation marker(s) and the manner in which these negation marker(s) are used in sentences. Transformational generative grammar theory of analysis was used in the work. The aim of this study is to determine the syntactic characteristics of negation in Urhobo. The study shows that negative construction in the Urhobo language involves the doubling of the last vowel of the last word in sentences; or what may be called the lengthening of the last vowel of the lexical item in the sentence. Also, the low-high tone can do the same function as the lexical or grammatical tone. It was observed that negation is a natural phenomenon that cuts across Urhobo, and that the orthographic representation of the low tone, which is the copying of the final vowel, is written contiguously while other negative markers are written separately. It was also observed that Urhobo operates suffixation. Finally, the study work reveals ejo, je, odie and and oyen as negative markers in Urhobo.
36
جمعة جمعة, مؤيد, and زينب محمود الكواز. "Syntax-Semantics Interface in Linguistic Theory." Al-Adab Journal 1, no. 122 (December 9, 2018): 41–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.31973/aj.v1i122.233.
Full textAbstract:
According to a process called selected focusing, the linguist in order to produce a coherent statement or an adequate description has to focus on one aspect of a language and exclude the others. Yet, such isolation is only an artificial element. A layman or a child does not have a least idea about the various levels of language. Yet, he is very-well equipped with the grammatical, structural, and semantic tools that help him to instantly identify the ill-formed or unmeaningful sentences of his native language as language is learned and taught as a whole.
With regard to syntax-semantics interface in linguistic literature, two opposite mainstreams have been found; a syntactically- oriented perspective (Chomsky 1957, 65, 79, 81, Cullicover 1976, Radford 1988, Horrock 1987, and Haegman 1992) modified and supported later on by the Optimality Theory approach (henceforth OT) established by Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky (1993) and a semantically-oriented one in its two facets the generative and the interpretive (Jerrold J. Katz & Jerry A. Fodor: 1963, George Lakoff 1963) developed in some of its aspects by Charles Fillmore's case grammar (1968). Furthermore, a great deal of effort has been proposed in line with these two opposite approaches to produce some experimental psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic studies to support or reject one or both of them (Millar & Mckean 1964, Savin & Perchonock 1965, and Clifton & Odom 1966, Gleason, J. & Ratner, N. 1993, Friederici, Angela D., & Jürgen Weissenborn 2007).
The early generative transformational approach went too far in insisting that the syntactic aspect has an autonomous characteristic and should be dealt with in isolation from semantics; others argue that they are interrelated and cannot be separated. Some linguists as the generative semanticists consider semantics as more basic in grammatical description than syntax; whereas, others hold a totally reversed approach assuming that semantics cannot be described and it should be considered as an extra-linguistic element.
This paper is at attempt to shed some light on this serious linguistic controversy to arrive at some general outlines that might help the linguistic theorists, language second/foreign teachers and students to establish a scientific scheme in dealing with language.
37
Sternefeld, Wolfgang. "Back to the future." English Language and Linguistics 3, no. 1 (May 1999): 147–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1360674399000167.
Full textAbstract:
Andrew Radford, Syntactic theory and the structure of English: a minimalist approach. Cambridge textbooks in linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1997. Pp. xii + 558. Hardback £50, US$69.95, ISBN 0 521 47125 7; paperback £16.95, US$24.95, ISBN 0 521 47707 7.Until recently I was convinced that by far the best textbook ever written on Generative Grammar was Perlmutter and Soames' Syntactic argumentation and the structure of English (1979). Unfortunately, the theory advanced there died out. As concerns its successor, namely GB-theory, I still believe that Andrew Radford's pioneering Transformational syntax (1981) is one of the best introductions to Chomsky's Pisa lectures, despite the plethora of competing textbooks that have appeared over the years. Now that Radford has presented his most recent book, Syntactic theory and the structure of English, I am inclined to believe that it should be considered a competitor to Perlmutter and Soames' book. Not only the similarity to Perlmutter and Soames' title, but also the pedagogical and systematic orientation of the new book invites comparison. As both books meet the highest standards with regard to clarity of expression and exposition, I recommend Radford's book as the best textbook for up-to-date syntactic theory, and I am convinced that it will play the same influential role as an introduction to the Minimalist theory as did the 1981 book for GB theory.
38
Cui, Yanying, and Yidong Wei. "Reduction: The Solution to Mind Representation?" Chinese Semiotic Studies 15, no. 3 (August 27, 2019): 303–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/css-2019-0019.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Chomsky is an evolutionary figure in linguistics. His greatest contribution lies in transformational generative grammar, which put an end to the leading position structuralism had held in language for more than 30 years. His naturalistic methodology has greatly influenced the research of both linguistics and psychology, and he is also considered to be the first to study language from the cognitive perspective. He insists on a naturalistic methodology; therefore, he was even considered by some to be a physicalist. However, this is not the case. On the contrary, TGG, as a critique of the behaviorist view of language, is intertwined with a critique of physicalism. On the one hand, he thinks the mind, like chemical elements and electrons, can be approached from a third-person perspective; on the other hand, he again admits there exists consciousness, which can be merely approached in terms of a first-person authority, which, therefore, is a fatal challenge to his core theory. Now there remains a new solution to this dilemma, that is, to admit that the mind is a special natural phenomenon with two means of existence: one is involved in physical aspects with the brain, and the other is concerned with something mental, with the former approached by a third-person perspective and the latter better researched via a first-person authority.
39
Filimon, Rosina Caterina. "Decoding the Musical Message via the Structural Analogy between Verbal and Musical Language." Artes. Journal of Musicology 18, no. 1 (March 1, 2018): 151–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/ajm-2018-0009.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The topic approached in this paper aims to identify the structural similarities between the verbal and the musical language and to highlight the process of decoding the musical message through the structural analogy between them. The process of musical perception and musical decoding involves physiological, psychological and aesthetic phenomena. Besides receiving the sound waves, it implies complex cognitive processes being activated, whose aim is to decode the musical material at cerebral level. Starting from the research methods in cognitive psychology, music researchers redefine the process of musical perception in a series of papers in musical cognitive psychology. In the case of the analogy between language and music, deciphering the musical structure and its perception are due, according to researchers, to several common structural configurations. A significant model for the description of the musical structure is Noam Chomsky’s generative-transformational model. This claimed that, at a deep level, all languages have the same syntactic structure, on account of innate anatomical and physiological structures which became specialized as a consequence of the universal nature of certain mechanisms of the human intellect. Chomsky’s studies supported by sophisticated experimental devices, computerised analyses and algorithmic models have identified the syntax of the musical message, as well as the rules and principles that underlie the processing of sound-related information by the listener; this syntax, principles and rules show surprising similarities with the verbal language. The musicologist Heinrich Schenker, 20 years ahead of Chomsky, considers that there is a parallel between the analysis of natural language and that of the musical structure, and has developed his own theory on the structure of music. Schenker’s structural analysis is based on the idea that tonal music is organized hierarchically, in a layering of structural levels. Thus, spoken language and music are governed by common rules: phonology, syntax and semantics. Fred Lerdahl and Ray Jackendoff develop a musical grammar where a set of generating rules are defined to explain the hierarchical structure of tonal music. The authors of the generative theory propose the hypothesis of a musical grammar based on two types of rules, which take into account the conscious and unconscious principles that govern the organization of the musical perception. The structural analogy between verbal and musical language consists of several common elements. Among those is the hierarchical organization of both fields, a governance by the same rules – phonology, syntax, semantics – and as a consequence of the universal nature of certain mechanisms of the human intellect, decoding the transmitted message is accomplished thanks to some universal innate structures, biologically inherited. Also, according to Chomsky's linguistics model a musical grammar is configured, one governed by wellformed rules and preference rules. Thus, a musical piece is not perceived as a stream of disordered sounds, but it is deconstructed, developed and assimilated at cerebral level by means of cognitive pre-existing schemes.
40
Pérez Lorido, Rodrigo. "On the Grammatical Domain of Gapping in Old English." Diachronica 13, no. 2 (January 1, 1996): 319–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/dia.13.2.06per.
Full textAbstract:
SUMMARY This paper is a study of verbal ellipsis in coordinated constructions in Old English, carried out within the theoretical framework of Transformational Grammar and assuming a deletion-based approach. The rule analysed here is the one known as Gapping, and the study focuses primarily on the discussion of its grammatical domain, trying to determine if the rule is a syntactic one or if it falls outside the domain of pure syntax. In order to achieve this, two basic aspects are dealt with which have traditionally constituted good tests of the grammatical nature of Gapping in different languages within the deletion-based approach: the extent to which the application of the rule depends on structural parallelism, and the possibility that Gapping may apply to non-adjacent sentences. The method I have pursued consists of analysing the Gapping patterns found in a corpus of seven Old English texts and comparing them with the well-known facts for Modern English under different perspectives. The conclusions I have come to seem to suggest that Gapping in Old English cannot be accounted for from a purely syntactic point of view and that stipulations of a pragmatic nature must also be included in its formulation. This has obvious consequences for a theory of ellipsis in Old English in particular, and for a theory of Old English grammar in general, for it might suggest that word order in Old English would nut rely only on principles of a syntactic nature, but also on others of a pragmatic, discourse-based one. RÉSUMÉ II s'agit, dans cet article, d'une etude de l'ellipse verbale dans les structures coordonnees en vieil-anglais, etude entreprise dans le cadre theorique de la grammaire generative transformationnelle et dans la perspective d'effacement par identite. La reglejque nous analysons ici est connue sous le nom de 'gapping' et le but fondamental de notre etude est de delimiter le domaine-gramma-tical ou cette regie opere, tout en essayant de demontrer s'il s'agit d'une regie strictement syntaxique ou si — au contraire — il s'agit d'une regie qui deborde le champ de la syntaxe. Pour atteindre ce but on a analyse surtout deux aspects qui constituent, traditionnellement, des preuves fiables lors de la determination du domaine grammatical du 'gapping', a savoir, le degre de parallelisme structural necessaire pour que la regie y opere et la possibilité d'application de celle-ci dans des phrases non adjacentes. La demarche suivie dans cette etude con-siste a analyser les differents exemples de 'gapping' depouilles dans un corpus constitue par sept textes d'ancien anglais, et a les comparer avec des faits pertinents en anglais moderne sous d'autres perspectives. Les conclusions aux-quelles l'auteur a abouti semblent indiquer que le 'gapping' en ancien anglais repond moins a des restrictions syntaxiques qu'en anglais moderne, et que dans sa formulation des stipulations syntaxiques aussi bien que pragmatico-discursives doivent y intervenir. Ce fait aura d'evidentes repercussions pour une theorie de l'ellipse en ancien anglais et, par la, meme pour une theorie de la grammaire de 1'ancien anglais en general, puisqu'il suggere que l'ordre des mots dans cette langue n'est pas uniquement le reflet de principes de type syn-taxique, mais egalement de type communicatif et discursif. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Dieser Aufsatz untersucht die verbale Auslassung in koordinierten Kon-struktionen des Altenglischen; dabei diente sowohl die generative Transforma-tionsgrammatik als auch die Gleichheitsauslassung als theoretische Grundlage. Die hier analysierte Regel ist allgemeinhin als 'Gapping' bekannt. Die Studie befaßt sich hauptsachlich mit der Untersuchung der grammatischen Reichweite dieser Regel; dabei wird versucht zu ermitteln, ob sie nur auf den syntak-tischen Bereich angewandt werden kann oder ob sie liber die reine Syntax hinausreicht. Um dies zu erreichen, werden zwei grundlegende grammatische Aspekte genauer untersucht, die erfahrungsgemaB zu guten Ergebnissen bei der grammatischen Analyse von Gapping in anderen Sprachen beigetragen ha-ben: das AusmaB, von dem die Anwendung der Regel von struktureller Paral-lelitat abhangt, und die Moglichkeit, daB Gapping auch bei nicht aufeinander folgenden Satzen angetroffen werden kann. Die hier angewandte Methode besteht aus einer Analyse der vorhandenen Muster von Gapping in einem Korpus von sieben altenglischen Texten und einem anschließenden Vergleich mit den weitlaufig bekannten Fakten des modernen Englisch. Die Ergebnisse, zu denen der Autor gekommen ist, machen deutlich, daB im Altenglischen Gapping nicht so sehr den syntaktischen Restriktionen entspricht wie im modernen Englisch, und daB man in seine Formulierung auch grammatisch-diskursive Festlegungen einschließen soil. Das hat deutlich Folgen für eine Theorie der Auslassung im Altenglischen und auch fiir eine Grammatiktheorie des Altenglischen im Allgemeinen, denn das würde heiBen, daB die Wort-stellung in dieser Sprache nicht nur von Prinzipien syntaktischer Art abhangig ist, sondern auch von solchen kommunikativer und diskursiver Natur.
41
Tabaian, Hessam. "Conjunction, Relativization, and Complementation in Persian." Colorado Research in Linguistics 5, no. 1 (2018). http://dx.doi.org/10.33011/5.1.2.
Full text
42
Ahmed M. S. Alduais. "A Brief Account of the Base Component of Transformational Generative Grammar." International Journal of Indian Psychology 3, no. 1 (December 25, 2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.25215/0301.073.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: To briefly introduce base component of transformational generative grammar (TGG). Method: The study is mainly descriptive where previous and related studies are reviewed and presented to reach a view about the base component of TGG. Results: Base component serves as input to two basic elements of language which are semantic rules and deep structure. Semantic rules give semantic representation. Deep structure leads to transformational rules or transformations which again lead to surface structure. Conclusions: Base component has been introduced and modified in different stages under standard theory (ST) and then it has been modified to extended standard theory (EST). Later on and as a recent modification of this theory, it has been introduced in terms of what is known in nowadays as revised extended standard theory (REST).
43
Ahmed Mohammed Saleh Alduais. "An Account of Rise and fall of Transformational Generative Grammar TGG: A Descriptive Study." International Journal of Indian Psychology 3, no. 1 (December 25, 2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.25215/0301.062.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: To account for the rise and fall of transformational generative grammar (TGG). Method: The researcher followed a descriptive research approach where the presentation of this paper is totally based on previous studies accounting for TGG. Results: There were many reasons for the rise of TGG including: innovativeness of this approach, its presentation in relation to other fields like mathematics a logic, providing more reasonable answers for controversial issue in regard to language, etc.. On the other hand, there were many reason that have lead to the fall of this approach including: ambiguity resulting from integration with other fields, namely mathematics and logic, rise of sub-schools most importantly generative semantics, frequent modifications of the proposed theory, etc.. Conclusions: In spite of the fact that TGG was able to approach language innovatively but it seemed clearly to link human cognitive abilities to the proposed theory. More focus was based on the sentence level ignoring meaning and text.
44
Sauerland, Uli, and Artemis Alexiadou. "Generative Grammar: A Meaning First Approach." Frontiers in Psychology 11 (November 23, 2020). http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.571295.
Full textAbstract:
The theory of language must predict the possible thought—signal (or meaning—sound or sign) pairings of a language. We argue for a Meaning First architecture of language where a thought structure is generated first. The thought structure is then realized using language to communicate the thought, to memorize it, or perhaps with another purpose. Our view contrasts with the T-model architecture of mainstream generative grammar, according to which distinct phrase-structural representations—Phonetic Form (PF) for articulation, Logical Form (LF) for interpretation—are generated within the grammar. At the same time, our view differs from early transformational grammar and generative semantics: We view the relationship between the thought structure and the corresponding signal as one of compression. We specify a formal sketch of compression as a choice between multiple possible pronounciations balancing the desire to transmit information against the effort of pronounciation. The Meaning First architecture allows a greater degree of independence between thought structures and the linguistic signal. We present three arguments favoring this type of independence. First we argue that scopal properties can be better explained if we only compare thought structures independent of the their realization as a sentence. Secondly, we argue that Meaning First architecture allows contentful late insertion, an idea that has been argued for in Distributed Morphology already, but as we argue is also motivated by the division of the logical and socio-emotive meaning content of language. Finally, we show that only the Meaning First architecture provides a satisfying account of the mixing of multiple languages by multilingual speakers, especially for cases of simultaneous articulation across two modalities in bimodal speakers. Our view of the structure of grammar leads to a reassessment of priorities in linguistic analyses: while current mainstream work is often focused on establishing one-to-one relationships between concepts and morphemes, our view makes it plausible that primitive concepts are frequently marked indirectly or unpronounced entirely. Our view therefore assigns great value to the understanding of logical primitives and of compression.
45
Khasanah, Noor. "Transformational Linguistics and the Implication Towards Second Language Learning." Register Journal 3, no. 1 (July 1, 2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v3i1.439.
Full textAbstract:
The essence of Chomsky’s approach to language is the claim that there are linguistic universals in domain of syntax. He felt confident to show that syntax can be defined for any given language. For Chomsky, the nature of such mental representations is largely innate, so if a grammatical theory has explanatory adequacy it must be able to explain the various grammatical nuances of the languages of the world as relatively minor variations in the universal pattern of human language. In teaching English as L2, therefore knowing syntax and grammar of the language is important. Transformational Generative Grammar gives adequate elaboration in understanding them. Thus, the learners are expected to be able to avoid such ambiguity in interpreting the deep structure of a sentence since ambiguity will lead other people as the listeners or hearers of the speakers to misinterpret either consciously or unconsciously.
46
Venkova, Tzvetomira. "“Chomskyan revolution” in Bulgarian socio-cultural and linguistic environment." Slavia Meridionalis 18 (December 24, 2018). http://dx.doi.org/10.11649/sm.1540.
Full textAbstract:
Chomskyan revolution in Bulgarian socio-cultural and linguistic environment The term Chomskyan revolution, referring to the innovative current in modern American linguistics and Noam Chomsky as it’s leading figure, permeated the metaphorical imagery of the popular linguistic and socio-cultural spheres in the USA. This term actually surpassed specialized linguistic circles, where it designated Chomsky’s transformational-generative grammar model and normally appeared in quotation marks. However, although Chomskyan revolution came to occupy a central position in the American network of unquestioned cultural mythologemes, its Bulgarian reception was different. The overall impression in Bulgarian linguistic and socio-cultural circles regarding the revolutionary leap has been rather skeptical and reserved, although the Chomskyan grammar model itself has been introduced into research practice. Such a difference in attitudes towards the status of transformational-generative grammar in the source and a target country is discussed here in terms of motivations and basic positions. Rewolucja Chomsky’ego w bułgarskim środowisku społeczno-kulturowym i lingwistycznymTermin „rewolucja Chomsky'ego”, odnoszący się do całkowicie nowatorskiego nurtu współczesnego językoznawstwa amerykańskiego i Chomsky'ego jako jego wiodącej postaci, przeniknął do popularnej sfery językowej i społeczno-kulturowej w USA jako część ich metaforycznego imaginarium. Przekroczył on niejako granice wyspecjalizowanych środowisk lingwistycznych, które standardowo zapisywały go w cudzysłowie, i ostatecznie wyznaczył model gramatyki transformacyjno-generatywnej Chomsky'ego. Chociaż „rewolucja Chomsky’ego” stała się centralnym elementem amerykańskiej siatki niekwestionowanych mitologemów kulturowych, środowisko bułgarskie zareagowało inaczej. Ogólna opinia bułgarskich środowisk językoznawczych i społeczno-kulturowych na temat rewolucyjnego skoku była dość sceptyczna i pełna zastrzeżeń, chociaż sam model gramatyki Chomsky'ego został wprowadzony do praktyki badawczej. Przedmiotem artykułu jest właśnie ta odmienność postaw pod względem motywacji i stanowisk zajmowanych wobec statusu gramatyki transformacyjno-generatywnej w kraju źródłowym i kraju odbiorcy.
47
Sharma Yadav, Meenakshi. "Role of the Transformational Generative Grammar and other Language Learning Theories in English Language Teaching." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3567848.
Full text
48
Sharma Yadav, Meenakshi, and Manoj Kumar Yadav. "Role of the Transformational Generative Grammar and other Language Learning Theories in English Language Teaching." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3665190.
Full text
49
Nicolau, Eunice, and Seung Hwa Lee. "O ESTATUTO DA MORFOLOGIA NOS ESTUDOS GRAMATICAIS." Organon 18, no. 36 (August 6, 2004). http://dx.doi.org/10.22456/2238-8915.31160.
Full textAbstract:
The linguistic studies in Ancient Greek and Roman traditions were concerned about themeaning and gave priority to elaborate the theory of “Parts of Speech” –morphology was the principalconcerns of linguistic studies until the 18th century. In the 19th century, the phonological facts (soundchange) began to receive attentions in linguistic studies. In the beginning of Generative Grammar,there was no autonomous component for the lexicon, which was conceived simply as a list of lexicalformatives, but in later theories it is considered as a component of complex internal structures. Inthis perspective, word formation processes (derivation, inflection, compounding, etc.) have motivateddifferent hypotheses: Transformational Hypothesis, Weak Lexicalist Hypothesis and Strong LexicalistHypothesis. The objective of this study is to show the status of morphology in linguistic traditionsand its status in linguistic studies.
50
Barman, Binoy. "The Linguistic Philosophy of Noam Chomsky." Philosophy and Progress, January 16, 2014, 103–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/pp.v51i1-2.17681.
Full textAbstract:
Noam Chomsky, one of the most famous linguists of the twentieth century, based his linguistic works on certain philosophical doctrines. His main contribution to linguistics is Transformational Generative Grammar, which is founded on mentalist philosophy. He opposes the behaviourist psychology in favour of innatism for explaining the acquisition of language. He claims that it becomes possible for human child to learn a language for the linguistic faculty with which the child is born, and that the use of language for an adult is mostly a mental exercise. His ideas brought about a revolution in linguistics, dubbed as Chomskyan Revolution. According to him, the part of language which is innate to human being would be called Universal Grammar. His philosophy holds a strong propensity to rationalism in search of a cognitive foundation. His theory is a continuation of analytic philosophy, which puts language in the centre of philosophical investigation. He would also be identified as an essentialist. This paper considers various aspects of Chomskys linguistic philosophy with necessary elaborations.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/pp.v51i1-2.17681