Generative grammar
By Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar
Get the List of 5,400+ Translation Agencies Now!
No Recurring Membership Fees!
In theoretical
linguistics, generative grammar refers to a particular
approach to the study of syntax.
A generative grammar of a language attempts to give a set
of rules that will correctly predict which combinations
of words will form grammatical sentences. In most approaches
to generative grammar, the rules will also predict the morphology
of a sentence.
Generative grammar originates in the work of Noam
Chomsky, beginning in the late 1950s. (Early versions
of Chomsky's theory were called transformational
grammar.) There are a number of competing versions of
generative grammar currently practiced within linguistics.
Chomsky's current theory is known as the Minimalist
Program. Other prominent theories include or have included
Head-driven
phrase structure grammar, Lexical
functional grammar, Categorial
grammar, Relational
grammar, and Tree-adjoining
grammar.
Noam
Chomsky has argued that many of the properties of a
generative grammar arise from an "innate" Universal
grammar, which is common to all languages. Proponents
of generative grammar have argued that most grammar is not
the result of communicative function and is not simply learned
from the environment. In this respect, generative grammar
takes a point of view different from functional
and behaviourist
theories.
Most versions of generative grammar characterize sentences
as either grammatically
correct (also known as well formed) or not. The rules
of a generative grammar typically function as an algorithm
to predict grammaticality as a discrete (yes-or-no) result.
In this respect, it differs from stochastic
grammar which considers grammaticality as a probabilistic
variable. However, some work in generative grammar (e.g.
recent work by Joan
Bresnan) uses stochastic versions of Optimality
theory.
Frameworks
There are a number of different approaches to generative
grammar. Common to all is the effort to come up with a set
of rules or principles that will account for the well-formed
expressions of a natural
language. The term generative grammar has been
associated with at least the following schools of linguistics:
Historical development of models
of generative grammar
Generative grammar has been under development since the
late 1950s, and has undergone many changes in the types
of rules and representations that are used to predict grammaticality.
In tracing the historical development of ideas within generative
grammar, it is useful to refer to various stages in the
development of the theory.
Standard Theory (1957-1965)
The so-called Standard Theory corresponds to the original
model of generative grammar laid out in Chomsky (1965).
A core aspect of Standard Theory is a distinction between
two different representations of a sentence, called Deep
Structure and Surface
Structure. The two representations are linked to each
other by Transformational
grammar.
Extended Standard Theory (1965-1973)
The so-called Extended Standard Theory was formulated in
the late 1960s to early 1970s. Features are:
Revised Extended Standard Theory
(1973-1980)
The so-called Revised Extended Standard Theory was formulated
between 1973 and 1980. It contains
Relational grammar (ca. 1975-1990)
An alternative model of syntax based on the idea that notions
like Subject, Direct Object, and Indirect Object play a
primary role in grammar.
Government and Binding/Principles
and Parameters theory (1981-1990)
Chomsky's Lectures on Government and Binding (1981)
and Barriers (1986).
Minimalist Program (1990-present)
Context-free grammars
Generative grammars can be described and compared with
the aid of the Chomsky
hierarchy proposed by Noam Chomsky in the 1950s. This
sets out a series of types of formal grammars with increasing
expressive power. Among the simplest types are the regular
grammars (type 3); Chomsky claims that regular grammars
are not adequate as models for human language, because all
human languages allow the center-embedding of strings within
strings.
At a higher level of complexity are the context-free
grammars (type 2). The derivation of a sentence by a
grammar can be depicted as a derivation tree.
Linguists working in generative grammar often view such
derivation trees as a primary object of study. According
to this view, a sentence is not merely a string of words,
but rather a tree with subordinate and superordinate branches
connected at nodes.
Essentially, the tree model works something like this example,
in which S is a sentence, D is a determiner,
N a noun,
V a verb,
NP a noun
phrase and VP a verb
phrase:
The resulting sentence could be The dog ate the bone.
Such a tree diagram is also called a phrase
marker. They can be represented more conveniently in
text form, (though the result is less easy to read); in
this format the above sentence would be rendered as:
[S [NP [D The ] [N
dog ] ] [VP [V ate ] [NP
[D the ] [N bone ] ] ] ]
Chomsky has argued that phrase structure grammars are also
inadequate for describing natural languages, and has formulated
the more complex system of transformational
grammar.[1]
Grammaticality judgements
When generative grammar was first proposed, it was widely
hailed as a way of formalizing the implicit set of rules
a person "knows" when they know their native language and
produce grammatical utterances in it (grammaticality
intuitions). However Chomsky has repeatedly rejected
that interpretation; according to him, the grammar of a
language is a statement of what it is that a person has
to know in order to recognize an utterance as grammatical,
but not a hypothesis about the processes involved in either
understanding or producing language.
In any case the reality is that most native speakers would
reject many sentences produced even by a phrase structure
grammar. For example, although very deep embeddings are
allowed by the grammar, sentences with deep embeddings are
not accepted by listeners, and the limit of acceptability
is an empirical matter that varies between individuals,
not something that can be easily captured in a formal grammar.
Consequently, the influence of generative grammar in empirical
psycholinguistics
has declined considerably.
Music
Generative grammar has been used in music
theory and analysis
such as by Fred
Lerdahl and in Schenkerian
analysis.
See also
References
- ^
Chomsky, Noam (1956).
"Three
models for the description of language". IRE Transactions
on Information Theory 2: 113–124. doi:10.1109/TIT.1956.1056813.
Further reading
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar
Published - November 2008
|
