TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

Level: Licence 2

Academic year: 2023-2024

First requirements: Notions on linguistics and language structures

Teacher : Dr. OUATTARA D. Zana

Objectives of the course

Objectives of the course: The objectives of TGG are to do more than describing old produced
utterances to take into account possible future utterances, taking into account the characteristic
of productivity or creativity which is an ability of human beings. Therefore, throughout this
course, help by the systematic characteristic of language, we’ll focus on theories that
characterize the TGG, making sentences interpretation and understanding more easy for
students of 2nd year. At the end of the course, students should be at their ease before any
sentence structure, as far as the understanding of the articulations of sentences are concerned.

Content
I- Basic concepts in TGG

II- First formulation of the TGG or The Standard Theory

III- The new look Grammar

Bibliography

1- Aitchison J, Linguistics, an Introduction, 10th ed., Great Britain, 1999.

2- Chomsky N, the logical structure of linguistic theory, , NY, 1955

3- --------------, on wh-movement, formal syntax, NY, 1977

4- --------------, Lectures on Government and binding, Dordrecht: Foris, 1981

5- Dubois-Charlier F., Elements de linguistique anglaise : Syntaxe, Langue et Langage,

Paris, 1970

1
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

6- Gueron J., la Grammaire générative in les théories de la Grammaire Anglaise en France

edited by Pierre Cotte and al, Huchette, 1993.

7- Gueron J., Topicalisation structures and constraints on coreference, Lingua, 1984

Pedagogic method
• Teaching activities.

The course will be given in a form of lecture; and concerns of students shall find their answers during
the lecture.

• Learning activities

At the end of each chapter, a period will be found for students to ask questions on the chapter. In
addition, questions will be asked and answered to reinforce their understanding of the passage at
stake.

• Testing.
At the end of the whole course, students will be submitted to a written test in the form of a
questionnaire. And at the end, a final exam will be organized to assess students understanding.

Bibliography

1- Aitchison J, Linguistics, an Introduction, 10th ed., Great Britain, 1999.

2- Chomsky N, the logical structure of linguistic theory, , NY, 1955

3- --------------, on wh-movement, formal syntax, NY, 1977

4- --------------, Lectures on Government and binding, Dordrecht: Foris, 1981

5- Dubois-Charlier F., Elements de linguistique anglaise : Syntaxe, Langue et Langage,

Paris, 1970

6- Gueron J., la Grammaire générative in les théories de la Grammaire Anglaise en France

edited by Pierre Cotte and al, Huchette, 1993.

7- Gueron J., Topicalisation structures and constraints on coreference, Lingua, 1984

2
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

INTRODUCTION

Born in the mid of the 20tieth C, the GG has fundamentally changed language study. In fact,
with the previous syntactic analysis, language was considered as a final product whereby
analyses consist in describing a corpus of actual produced utterances, leaving apart, the
characteristic of productivity or creativity which is an ability of human beings to produce and
understand an infinite numbers of novel structures. It is on the basis of these limits shown by
traditional syntactic analysis that an American linguist, named Noam Avram Chomsky,
initiated a new theory, the GG, which should do more than describing old produced utterances
to take into account possible future utterances.

I- Basic concepts in TGG

The aim of GG consists in shifting attention from detailed description of actual

utterances, to start asking questions about the nature of the system which produce the output.
In the view of Chomsky, anyone who knows a language must have internalized a set of rules
which specify the sequences permitted in their language and the task of the linguist is to
discover these rules. Therefore, questions like: What do we know when we know a language?
How do we acquire language? How the knowledge of language does operate, were central in
Chomsky’s theory. In answering to these questions concepts such as Innateness of language,
competence and performance of the speaker stand out.

1.1 innateness of language

TGG considers linguistics as a cognitive science which takes into account, in its study,
the psychology and the human biology. It goes on the basis that grammar is an autonomous
mental organ. Just like any other physical organ, grammar is not learned nor even acquired, but
it simply develops and is somehow influenced by the environment. Innateness of the language
is therefore the assumption that our mother tongue does not come from the outside world, but
it originated from inside the individual. In considering the complexity of human languages and
the way they are easily acquired by young children compels us to admit that not all the rules
they use to speak come from the outside. Chomsky finds two types of evidence to show
innateness of languages.

3
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

1.1.1- The positive evidence

This evidence was motivated by what he called the “weakness of the stimulus” also
called the “platon problem”: how to explain we know so much but with a few instruction?
And any speaker including children is endowed with the capacity of producing sentences they
have never heard. And to each sample of actual utterances corresponds a great number of
grammars capable of producing sentences it contains. Some of these grammars are context-
free while some others are context-dependent. All these facts entails that children are endowed
with a built-in system of language acquisition, called the Language Acquisition Device (LAD).

1.1.2- The negative evidence

It is based on the fact that in their linguistic exposure, children are exposed to a very limited
input, and sometimes to a distorted input, which means that around them, adults and parents
will sometimes speak with mistakes. But, children do not appear to reproduce the same mistakes
though they are not necessarily taught all the kinds of mistakes they should avoid. This means
that there is an auto-regulating device in their mind that does not make home for any kind of
wrong combinations. So it is as if the psychological apparatus were rallying out the
combinations that do not fit in their mind.

Along with both the negative and positive evidences, advocators of the TGG
made the hypothesis that there might exist in learners a language faculty (the LAD) also called
Universal Grammar (UG).

1.1.3- Universal Grammar

The Universal grammar is the theory of the initial state of the language organ before any
learning or acquisition. It identifies all the languages accessible to human being. Acquisition of
the mother tongue consists in moving from this initial state of language learning represented by
the UG to a stable mental state which is the knowledge of a particular language, as represented
by the equation:

UG + experience = Language 1

The UG correspond at the same time to all possible languages and to any particular language.
It contains some opened parameters next to the universal principles common to all the
languages. In hearing some utterances in his environment, children will give some value to
these parameters. The result of the UG and the values of these parameters made by their

4
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

experience is a particular language 1, a core grammar. Language 1 is therefore not a set of

utterances but a set of rules which can also correspond to what Chomsky called the competence
of the speaker.

1.2- the dichotomy competence/performance.

TGG is interested not on utterances produced by speakers but on mental representations

on which these utterances are based. It does not study the E-language, that is, the external
language but rather the I-language, the internal language which comes from intuition of native
speakers. This source is of a wide richness. This source accounts for the possibility of the
speaker to distinguish grammatical from non-grammatical sentences. This possibility is what
Chomsky calls competence of the speaker.

1.2.1- competence

Competence is the tacit knowledge of the language rules that the speaker uses to,
produce correct sentences in his language. Competence is a very powerful skill and using his
competence the ideal native speaker can produce and understand all possible sentences even
those he has never heard before, that is novel sentences. Speakers also use their competence to
make correct judgments on sentences. Competence is not only at the level of syntax, it manifests
itself at any level of language practice. In practice, competence is something complex and
nowadays people distinguish several types of competence.

➢ Grammatical competence

Grammatical competence belongs to language structure. It is the intuitive knowledge of

language. It refers to the assimilation of grammar rules.

e.g., Osbert cut himself. It is our knowledge of English that shows that “himself” refers to
Osbert.

➢ Pragmatic Competence

Pragmatic competence calls for non-linguistic information for the production and
interpretation of sentences. This type of competence belongs to language use.

e.g., the situation needs a courageous man like him.

5
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

This sentence is difficult to interpret, unless we know the situation we are talking about and the
man and what he did.

The competence of the speaker is what he uses in particular situations to communicate.

And this is also referred to as performance.

1.2.2- performance

Performance is the actual use or the exploitation of competence in real situations of

communication. Performance is then the externalization of the implicit rules of competence in
a particular situation. Very often, the performance of a native speaker does not reflect his
competence. This depends on the occasion and on external factors like tiredness, emotion,
emotions, lacks of attention, fear, age… that may cause performance to fail

II- First formulation of the TGG or The Standard Theory

The first formulation of TGG was developed by Chomsky and his disciples between 1957
and 1981. This model associates to each utterance, a representation to various linguistic levels;
that are: the phonological, morphological, syntactic and interpretative levels as follows:

SYNTACTIC RULES LEXICON

Deep structures

TRANSFORMATIONS

Surface structures

PHONOLOGICAL FORMS LOGICAL FORMS

Phonetic structures logical forms

Syntactic rules generate deep structures in which lexical items are inserted. Each lexical
item is sub-categorized along with the syntactic categories they are compatible (v scateg sN).
Deep structures are subject to transformations which turn them into surface structures. Some
transformations are obligatory (tenses in verb), and some others are optional (transf from active
to passive form).

6
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

2.1- Syntactic rules

Syntactic rules generate deep structures; they are some kinds of representations of
sentences with syntactic categories organized in hierarchy as follows:

1- S- NP VP 3- MN= DET +N 5- MV= V + NP

2- NP- nbre+MN 4- VP= aux + MV
e.g. John goes to the market
2.2- Transformational rules

Transformational rules are rules that transform semantic components into phonological
components. As such transformational grammar has like most other types of grammar three
major components: a syntactic component (dealing with syntax), a phonological component
(dealing with sounds) and a semantic component (dealing with meaning). However, it differs
from other grammars in that the syntactic component is split into two components: the base and
the transformational rules

TGG is a grammar which not only generate rules to build sentences, but also it sets up
two levels of structure (d-structure& the s-structure) related by means of operations known as
transformations. Such was not the case in the syntactic analysis which only had one structure.
What Chomsky wanted to underline is that, only the syntactic rules cannot account for the
speaker’s competence for they cannot tell what kind of relations exist between distinct phrases
such the N and the V. by the same token, they cannot establish the relation between sentences
which are lexically and semantically related but differ in only their grammatical mode
(assertive, interrogative, negative passive…). Only transformational rules enable to do this. But
they are constraints on transformational rules. Let consider the following sentence:

e.g., Herbert put the mango in his bag

This sentence contains the verb put which has to be followed by an NP and a PP. so, we
cannot say:

- Herbert put in his bag or

- Herbert put the mango
Now look at the following sentences:
What did Herbert put [ ] in his bag?

7
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

What did Herbert put the parrot in [ ]?

These sentences appear to have broken the requirement that put must be followed by an NP and
a PP. Instead, what appears at the beginning of the sentence, and there is a gap in the place
where one might have expected a word such as parrot, drawer to occur. It is by transformation
that we would have:

What did Herbert put in the bag? (Schema)

What did Herbert put the mango in? (Schema)
III- The new look Grammar

The new look grammar initiated in 1980’s is radically different from the standard theory
which we called the first formulation of TGG in a number of ways. The NLG is fairly simple
in its outlines. It consists essentially of a number of different components or modules, each of
which has a fairly specific and straightforward task to carry out in the building and
interpretation of sentences. Rules and principles in each component are simple and a few. Their
interaction gives different sentences in languages. Language faculty is conceived as a system
of calculations which are firm and constraining but which create through the agency of these
modules an infinite number of complex sentences. Each module is associated to a limited
number of parameters with limited values.

3.1- The Theory of syntactic movements/traces

Theory of syntactic movements is one of first types of transformations whereby a NP for

example can move from its original position (a position of argument) to another position (a non-
argument position) in the sentence structure. The wh-movement displaces any major category
containing a wh-item. These transformations give interrogative or relative sentences. But
anytime an item is moved from its original position it leaves a trace as in

John saw someone

Who i did john see t i
John built this house
This house i was built t i by john+
3.2- the Government and binding theory (théorie du liage)

The theory of government and binding pays particular attention to two aspects of grammar
which were virtually ignored in the standard theory: government on the one hand, and binding

8
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

on the other. Government involves the notion of a constituent having power on the others, and
binding deals with the linking or binding of items to one another. The word government is
usually used in connection with heads of phrases which influence others in their immediate
locality, in the sense of requiring them to exist as subsidiaries to themselves (in VP, V governs
NP). However, quite often there is an important relationship between words which are on
different branches and on different levels, as in

e.g., Marry had a dream about herself.

In a representation, Marry and herself are on different branches, and different levels, yet clearly
they have an intimate relationship, which needs to be clearly specify. Therefore, it’s important
to understand the relationship in order to interpret sentences properly. Let consider the
following sentences:

- Henry read the report about Stephen stabbing himself.

- Henry read the report about Stephen stabbing him.

Understanding the relationship of these sentences help to know that in the first sentence, it’s
Stephen who was stabbed, but Henry or someone else in the second one.

A major part of Chomsky’s new theory is to try and specify exactly which parts of trees
influence one another, and which can be linked in their interpretation. Therefore, he and his
followers will draw up a wider notion of government, known as command. A principle known
as c-command (constituent command) specifies which constituents have power over others
in a total tree structure. The notion of c-command enables to specify relationships and
restrictions between different parts of the sentence, (for example, in Marry had a dream about
herself, herself must be c-command by the person referred to.

Binding is strongly interlinked with the notion of c-command. A binding principle states
that when two NPs are co-indexed, that is, refer to the same person or thing, the antecedent
must c-command the anaphor.

To summarize so far, the government and binding theory is particularly concerned with
relationships between constituents. It specifies which constituents have power over others, the
overall purpose being to express simply and clearly which nodes on the tree are interlinked.
Only certain links are possible, discovering and describing these enables us to grasp the
principles underlying sentence interpretation.

9
TRANSFORMATIONAL AND GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

3.3- The X-bar theory

The x-bar theory goes on principle that any lexical item which is projected in syntax can
have an object or a specifier. The hierarchic structure is then constituted in which x is the head
of the projection. The use of bars has one further major advantage: they can be used with
adjectives (A), verbs (V), and prepositions (P), as well as with nouns (N). With bars, it is then
easy to see similarities in structures between NPs, APs, VPs and PPs which were not so evident
before. It turns out that the head (main word) in one type of phrase is in a very similar position
to the head in another.

e.g., the picture of the lion

3.4- Types of sentences

The new theory enables to represent any kind of sentence thanks to the elaboration of
transformational rules capable of representing different modes of sentences. The mode of the
sentence underlines the type of sentence produced. This type or mode of sentence is represented
by the symbol ∑→mod + S.

mod→ {decl/interr/imp} + (Emph) + (Nég)

so ∑ c-commands mod and P. 01736021

Bibliography

1- Aitchison J, Linguistics, an Introduction, 10th ed., Great Britain, 1999.

2- Chomsky N, the logical structure of linguistic theory, , NY, 1955
3- --------------, on wh-movement, formal syntax, NY, 1977
4- --------------, Lectures on Government and binding, Dordrecht: Foris, 1981
5- Dubois-Charlier F., Elements de linguistique anglaise : Syntaxe, Langue et Langage,
Paris, 1970
6- Gueron J., la Grammaire générative in les théories de la Grammaire Anglaise en France
edited by Pierre Cotte and al, Huchette, 1993.
7- Gueron J., Topicalisation structures and constraints on coreference, Lingua, 1984

10