Syntax 1

LEC: English Syntax of the Phrase Structure 2014
ENGLISH SYNTAX
The Syntax of the Phrase Structure
Second Year of Study
First Semester
T h e Fa c u l t y o f S o c i a l , H u m a n i s t i c a n d N a t u r a l Page 1
Sciences
Objectives
This course is meant to give a different perspective upon grammar and traditional ideas of
syntax. In the last decades, syntax has undoubtedly become the most intensively studied
topic within linguistics. Many new ideas and new linguistic models have been put forward.
At the same time, this course needs to take into account the fact that most of the best
descriptive accounts of actual languages have been written in fairly conservative terms and
have only partly been influenced by modern theoretical proposals. The purpose of the
course is to give the new perspective on the English syntax of the phrase structure based on
the old knowledge of the traditional grammar.
Starting with the traditional concepts, the course introduces first the new terminology, then
the new concepts and syntactical rules in order to make the student understand the
difference between the two perspectives upon the same subject. Later, the student will be
able to use the concepts and theoretical principles that were studied in the last semester in
the phrase analysis. Concepts such as morphemes, X-Bar theory, Noun Phrase and Verb
Phrase, Adjectival Phrases and Adverbial Phrases will be fully described and analyzed in
this course.
The structure of the phrase will be discussed using discovery procedures in order to let the
student develop a new type of vocabulary and to see and understand the manner that
makes the syntax to function in a given language. The student is supposed to discover the
means of making a phrase analysis and also to use these means in order to find the
theoretical background that supported any language manifestation.
Sciences
CONTENTS
Unit 1
The Formal Theory of Language . 5
Unit 2
The Generative Transformational Grammar 9
Unit 3
Chomskys Generative Transformational Grammar 14
Unit 4
Phrase Structure 21
Unit 5
The Hierarchy of Grammatical Levels .25
Unit 6
Phrase Structure Grammar .. 29
Unit 7
Surface Structure and Deep Structure . 33
Unit 8
Noun Phrase ... 36
Unit 9
Verb Phrase ... 43
Unit 10
Adjective Phrase 48
Sciences
Unit 11
Ad-Positional Phrases .. 53
Answer Key ... 61
Bibliography . 64
Sciences
UNIT 1
The Formal Theory of Language
In formal language theory, a grammar (when the context is not given, often called a formal
grammar) is a set of production rules for strings in a formal language. The rules describe how to
form strings from the language's alphabet that are valid according to the language's syntax. A
grammar does not describe the meaning of the strings or what can be done with them in whatever
contextonly their form.
The formal language theory is the discipline which studies formal grammars and languages. The
formal grammar is a set of rules for rewriting strings, along with a "start symbol" from which
rewriting starts. Therefore, a grammar is usually thought of as a language generator. However, it
can also sometimes be used as the basis for a "recognizer "a function in computing that
determines whether a given string belongs to the language or is grammatically incorrect. To
describe such recognizers, formal language theory uses separate formalisms, known as automata
theory. One of the interesting results of automata theory is that it is not possible to design a
recognizer for certain formal languages.
Parsing is the process of recognizing an utterance (a string in natural languages) by breaking it

down to a set of symbols and analyzing each one against the grammar of the language. Most
languages have the meanings of their utterances structured according to their syntaxa practice
known as compositional semantics. As a result, the first step to describing the meaning of an
utterance in language is to break it down part by part and look at its analyzed form (known as
its parse tree).
A grammar mainly consists of a set of rules for transforming strings. To generate a string in the
language, one begins with a string consisting of only a single start symbol. The production
rules are then applied in any order, until a string that contains neither the start symbol nor
designated non-terminal symbols is produced. A production rule is applied to a string by
replacing one occurrence of its left-hand side in the string by its right-hand side. The language
formed by the grammar consists of all distinct strings that can be generated in this manner. Any
particular sequence of production rules on the start symbol yields a distinct string in the
Sciences
language. If there are multiple ways of generating the same single string, the grammar is said to
be ambiguous.
For example, assume the alphabet consists of a and b. The start symbol is S and we have the
following production rules:
1.
2.
Then we start with S, and can choose a rule to apply to it. If we choose rule 1, we obtain the
string aSb. If we then choose rule 1 again, we replace S with aSb and obtain the string aaSbb. If
we now choose rule 2, we replace S with ba and obtain the string aababb, and are done. We can
write this series of choices more briefly, using symbols such as:
. The language of the grammar is then the infinite
set , where is repeated

times (and in particular represents the number of times production rule 1 has been applied).
Formal Definition
The Syntax of Grammars
In the classic formalization of generative grammars first proposed by Noam Chomsky in the
1950s, a grammar G consists of the following components:
A finite set N of non-terminal symbols, that is disjoint with the strings formed from G.
A finite set of terminal symbols that are disjoint from N.
A finite set P of production rules, each rule of the form.
That is, each production rule maps from one string of symbols to another, where the first string
(the "head") contains an arbitrary number of symbols provided at least one of them is a non-
terminal. In the case that the second string (the "body") consists solely of the empty string i.e.,
that it contains no symbols at all it may be denoted with a special notation ( , e, ) in order to
avoid confusion.
Sciences
A distinguished symbol is the start symbol.
A grammar is formally defined: . Such a formal grammar is often called a phrase

structure grammar.
The Semantics of Grammars
The operation of a grammar can be defined in terms of relations on strings:
Given the grammar, , the binary relation (pronounced as "G derives in
one step") on strings in is defined by:
The relation (pronounced as G derives in zero or more steps) is defined as the reflexive
transitive closure of
A sentential form is a member of that can be derived in a finite number of steps from
the start symbol ; that is, a sentential form is a member of .A

sentential form that contains no non-terminal symbols (i.e. it is a member of ) is called
a sentence.
The language of , denoted as , is defined as all those sentences that can be derived in a
finite number of steps from the start symbol ; that is, the set .
Note that the grammar is effectively rewriting strings in exactly the same
way; the only difference is in that we distinguish specific non-terminal symbols which must be
rewritten in rewrite rules, and are only interested in rewritings from the designated start symbol
to strings without non-terminal symbols.
Sciences
DO NOT FORGET!
1. In formal language theory, a grammar is a set of production rules for strings in a formal
language. The rules describe how to form strings from the language's alphabet that are
valid according to the language's syntax. A grammar does not describe the meaning of the
strings or what can be done with them in whatever contextonly their form.
2. Knowing the definition of a morpheme, the English syntax of the phrase structures can
establish what other grammatical units there are and how they are distributed.
3. Any sentence may be divided into smaller parts called immediate constituents. The
principle of immediate constituents analysis is to cut the sentence into two and then to cut
those parts into two and to continue with the segmentation until the smallest units, the
morphemes are reached.
QUESTIONS
1. When was first proposed the generative transformational grammar?
2. Who proposed the generative transformational grammar?
Sciences
UNIT 2
The Generative Transformational Grammar
A generative grammar, in the sense in which Noam Chomsky used the term, is a rule system
formalized with mathematical precision that generates, without need of any information that is
not represented explicitly in the system, the grammatical sentences of the language that it
describes, or characterizes, and assigns to each sentence a structural description, or grammatical
analysis. All the concepts introduced in this definition of generative grammar will be explained
and exemplified in the course of this section. Generative grammars fall into several types; this
exposition is concerned mainly with the type known as transformational (or, more fully,
transformational-generative). Transformational grammar was initiated by Harris Z. in the course
of work on what he called discourse analysis (the formal analysis of the structure of continuous
text). It was further developed and given a somewhat different theoretical basis by Chomsky.
Harris distinguished within the total set of grammatical sentences in a particular language (for
example, English) two complementary subsets: kernel sentences (the set of kernel sentences
being described as the kernel of the grammar) and non-kernel sentences. The difference between
these two subsets lies in non-kernel sentences being derived from kernel sentences by means of
transformational rules. For example, The workers rejected the ultimatum is a kernel sentence
that may be transformed into the non-kernel sentences The ultimatum was rejected by the
workers or Did the workers reject the ultimatum? Each of these may be described as a
transform of the kernel sentence from which it is derived. The transformational relationship
between corresponding active and passive sentences (e.g., The workers rejected the ultimatum
and The ultimatum was rejected by the workers) is conventionally symbolized by the rule
N1 V N2 N2 be V + en by N1, in which N stands for any noun or noun phrase, V for any
transitive verb, en for the past participle morpheme, and the arrow () instructs one to rewrite
the construction to its left as the construction to the right. (There has been some simplification of
the rule as it was formulated by Harris.) This rule may be taken as typical of the whole class of
transformational rules in Harriss system: it rearranges constituents (what was the first nominal,
or noun, N1, in the kernel sentence is moved to the end of the transform, and what was the
Sciences
second nominal, N2, in the kernel sentence is moved to initial position in the transform), and it
adds various elements in specified positions (be, en, and by). Other operations carried out by
transformational rules include the deletion of constituents; e.g., the entire phrase by the
workers is removed from the sentence The ultimatum was rejected by the workers by a rule
symbolized as N2 be V + en by N1 N2 be V + en. This transforms the construction on the left
side of the arrow (which resulted from the passive transformation) by dropping the by-phrase,
thus producing The ultimatum was rejected.
Bloomfields Theory of Syntax
Syntax, for Bloomfield, was the study of free forms that were composed entirely of free forms.
Central to his theory of syntax were the notions of form classes and constituent structure. (These
notions were also relevant, though less central, in the theory of morphology.) Bloomfield defined
form classes, rather imprecisely, in terms of some common recognizable phonetic or
grammatical feature shared by all the members. He gave as examples the form class consisting
of personal substantive expressions in English (defined as the forms that, when spoken with
exclamatory final pitch, are calls for a persons presence or attentione.g., John, Boy, Mr.
Smith); the form class consisting of infinitive expressions (defined as forms which, when
spoken with exclamatory final pitch, have the meaning of a commande.g., run, jump,
come here); the form class of nominative substantive expressions (e.g., John, the boys);
and so on. It should be clear from these examples that form classes are similar to, though not
identical with, the traditional parts of speech and that one and the same form can belong to more
than one form class.
What Bloomfield had in mind as the criterion for form class membership (and therefore of
syntactic equivalence) may best be expressed in terms of substitutability. Form classes are sets of
forms (whether simple or complex, free or bound), any one of which may be substituted for any
other in a given construction or set of constructions throughout the sentences of the language.
The smaller forms into which a larger form may be analyzed are its constituents, and the larger
form is a construction. For example, the phrase poor John is a construction analyzable into, or
composed of, the constituents poor and John. Because there is no intermediate unit of which
poor and John are constituents that is itself a constituent of the construction poor John, the
Sciences
forms poor and John may be described not only as constituents but also as immediate
constituents of poor John. Similarly, the phrase lost his watch is composed of three word
formslost, his, and watchall of which may be described as constituents of the
construction. Not all of them, however, are its immediate constituents. The forms his and
watch combine to make the intermediate construction his watch; it is this intermediate unit
that combines with lost to form the larger phrase lost his watch. The immediate constituents
of lost his watch are lost and his watch; the immediate constituents of his watch are the
forms his and watch. By the constituent structure of a phrase or sentence is meant the
hierarchical organization of the smallest forms of which it is composed (its ultimate constituents)
into layers of successively more inclusive units. Viewed in this way, the sentence Poor John lost
his watch is more than simply a sequence of five word forms associated with a particular
intonation pattern. It is analyzable into the immediate constituents poor John and lost his
watch, and each of these phrases is analyzable into its own immediate constituents and so on,
until, at the last stage of the analysis, the ultimate constituents of the sentence are reached. The
constituent structure of the whole sentence is represented by means of a tree diagram.
Each form, whether it is simple or composite, belongs to a certain form class. Using arbitrarily
selected letters to denote the form classes of English, poor may be a member of the form class
A, John of the class B, lost of the class C, his of the class D, and watch of the class E.
Because poor John is syntactically equivalent to (i.e., substitutable for) John, it is to be
classified as a member of A. So too, it can be assumed, is his watch. In the case of lost his
watch there is a problem. There are very many formsincluding lost, ate, and stole
that can occur, as here, in constructions with a member of B and can also occur alone; for
example, lost is substitutable for stole the money, as stole is substitutable for either or for
lost his watch. This being so, one might decide to classify constructions like lost his watch
as members of C. On the other hand, there are forms thatthough they are substitutable for
lost, ate, stole, and so on when these forms occur alonecannot be used in combination
with a following member of B (compare died, existed); and there are forms that, though they
may be used in combination with a following member of B, cannot occur alone
(compare enjoyed). The question is whether one respects the traditional distinction between
transitive and intransitive verb forms. It may be decided, then, that lost, stole, ate and so
forth belong to one class, C (the class to which enjoyed belongs), when they occur
Sciences
transitively (i.e., with a following member of B as their object) but to a different class, F (the
class to which died belongs), when they occur intransitively. Finally, it can be said that the
whole sentence Poor John lost his watch is a member of the form class G. Thus, the constituent
structure not only of Poor John lost his watch but of a whole set of English sentences can be
represented by means of the tree diagram. New sentences of the same type can be constructed by
substituting actual forms for the class labels.
Any construction that belongs to the same form class as at least one of its immediate constituents
is described as endocentric; the only endocentric construction in the model sentence above is
poor John. All the other constructions, according to the analysis, are exocentric. This is clear
from the fact that the letters at the nodes belong to every phrase other than the phrase A + B (i.e.,
poor John, old Harry, and so on) and are different from any of the letters at the ends of the
lower branches connected directly to these nodes. For example, the phrase D + E (i.e., his
watch, the money, and so forth) has immediately above it a node labeled B, rather than either
D or E. Endocentric constructions fall into two types: subordinating and coordinating. If
attention is confined, for simplicity, to constructions composed of no more than two immediate
constituents, it can be said that subordinating constructions are those in which only one
immediate constituent is of the same form class as the whole construction, whereas coordinating
constructions are those in which both constituents are of the same form class as the whole
construction. In a subordinating construction (e.g., poor John), the constituent that is
syntactically equivalent to the whole construction is described as the head, and its partner is
described as the modifier: thus, in poor John, the form John is the head and poor is its
modifier. An example of a coordinating construction is men and women, in which, it may be
assumed, the immediate constituents are the word men and the word women, each of which
is syntactically equivalent to men and women. (It is here implied that the conjunction and is
not a constituent, properly so called, but an element that, like the relative order of the
constituents, indicates the nature of the construction involved. Not all linguists have held this
view.)
Sciences
DO NOT FORGET!
1. A generative grammar, in the sense in which Noam Chomsky used the term, is a rule
system formalized with mathematical precision that generates, without need of any
information that is not represented explicitly in the system, the grammatical sentences of
the language that it describes, or characterizes, and assigns to each sentence a structural
description, or grammatical analysis. Generative grammars fall into several types.
2. Transformational grammar was initiated by Harris Z. in the course of work on what he

called discourse analysis (the formal analysis of the structure of continuous text). It was
further developed and given a somewhat different theoretical basis by Chomsky.
3. Harris distinguished within the total set of grammatical sentences in a particular language
(for example, English) two complementary subsets: kernel sentences (the set of kernel
sentences being described as the kernel of the grammar) and non-kernel sentences.
4. Syntax, for Bloomfield, was the study of free forms that were composed entirely of free
forms. Central to his theory of syntax were the notions of form classes and constituent
structure. (These notions were also relevant, though less central, in the theory of
morphology.)
5. Bloomfield defined form classes, rather imprecisely, in terms of some common

recognizable phonetic or grammatical feature shared by all the members.
6. By the constituent structure of a phrase or sentence is meant the hierarchical organization

of the smallest forms of which it is composed (its ultimate constituents) into layers of
successively more inclusive units.
QUESTIONS
1. What is a syntactical construction according to Bloomfield?
2. What is an endocentric construction?
3. State the two types of endocentric constructions.
Sciences
UNIT 3
Chomskys Transformational Generative Grammar
Chomskys system of transformational grammar, though it was developed on the basis of his
work with Harris, differed from Harriss in a number of respects. It was Chomskys system that
attracted the most attention and received the most extensive exemplification and further
development. As outlined in Syntactic Structures (1957), it comprised three sections, or
components: the phrase-structure component, the transformational component, and the
morphophonemic component. Each of these components consisted of a set of rules operating
upon a certain input to yield a certain output. The notion of phrase structure may be dealt
with independently of its incorporation in the larger system. In the following system of rules, S
stands for Sentence, NP for Noun Phrase, VP for Verb Phrase, Det. for Determiner, Aux for
Auxiliary (verb), N for Noun, and V for Verb stem.
1. S NP + VP
2. VP Verb + NP
3. NP Det. + N
4. Verb Aux. + V
5. Det. the, a
6. N man, ball
7. Aux. will, can
8. V hit, see
This is a simple phrase-structure grammar. It generates and thereby defines as grammatical such
sentences as The man will hit the ball, and it assigns to each sentence that it generates a
structural description. The kind of structural description assigned by a phrase-structure grammar
is, in fact, a constituent structure analysis of the sentence.
Sciences
In these rules, the arrow can be interpreted as an instruction to rewrite (this is to be taken as a
technical term) whatever symbol appears to the left of the arrow as the symbol or string of
symbols that appears to the right of the arrow. For example, rule (2) rewrites the symbol VP as
the string of symbols Verb + NP, and it thereby defines Verb + NP to be a construction of the type
VP. Or, alternatively and equivalently, it says that constructions of the type VP may have as their
immediate constituents constructions of the type Verb and NP (combined in that order). Rule (2)
can be thought of as creating or being associated with the tree structure.
Rules (1)(8) do not operate in isolation but constitute an integrated system. The symbol S
(standing mnemonically for sentence) is designated as the initial symbol. This information is
not given in the rules (1)(8), but it can be assumed either that it is given in a kind of protocol
statement preceding the grammatical rules or that there is a universal convention according to
which S is always the initial symbol. It is necessary to begin with a rule that has the initial
symbol on the left. Thereafter any rule may be applied in any order until no further rule is
applicable; in doing so a derivation can be constructed of one of the sentences generated by the
grammar. If the rules are applied in the following order: (1), (2), (3), (3), (4), (5), (5), (6), (6), (7),
(8), then assuming that the is selected on both applications of (5), man on one application of
(6), and ball on the other, will on the application of (7), and hit on the application of (8),
the following derivation of the sentence The man will hit the ball will have been constructed:
i. S
ii. NP + VP by rule 1
iii. NP + Verb + NP by rule 2
iv. Det. + N + Verb + NP by rule 3
v. Det. + N + Verb + Det. + N by rule 3
vi. Det. + N + Aux. + V + Det. + N by rule 4
vii. The + N + Aux. + V + Det. + N by rule 5
Sciences
viii. The + N + Aux. + V + the + N by rule 5
ix. The + man + Aux. + V + the + N by rule 6
x. The + man + Aux. + V + the + ball by rule 6
xi. The + man + will + V + the + ball by rule 7
xii. The + man + will + hit + the + ball by rule 8
Many other derivations of this sentence are possible, depending on the order in which the rules
are applied. The important point is that all these different derivations are equivalent in that they
can be reduced to the same tree diagram. If this is compared with the system of rules, it will be
seen that each application of each rule creates or is associated with a portion (or sub-tree) of the
tree. The tree diagram, or phrase marker, may now be considered as a structural description of
the sentence The man will hit the ball. It is a description of the constituent structure, or phrase
structure, of the sentence, and it is assigned by the rules that generate the sentence.
It is important to interpret the term generate in a static, rather than a dynamic, sense. The
statement that the grammar generates a particular sentence means that the sentence is one of the
total number of the sentences that the grammar defines to be grammatical or well formed. All the
sentences are generated, as it were, simultaneously. The notion of generation must be interpreted
as would be a mathematical formula containing variables. For example, in evaluating the
formula y 2 + y for different values of y, one does not say that the formula itself generates these
various resultant values (2, when y = 1; 5, when y = 2; etc.) one after another or at different
times; one says that the formula generates them all simultaneously or, better still perhaps,
timelessly. The situation is similar for a generative grammar. Although one sentence rather than
another can be derived on some particular occasion by making one choice rather than another at
particular places in the grammar, the grammar must be thought of as generating all sentences
statically or timelessly.
Sciences
It has been noted that, whereas a phrase-structure grammar is one that consists entirely of phrase-
structure rules, a transformational grammar (as formalized by Chomsky) includes both the
phrase-structure and the transformational rules (as well as morphophonemic rules). The
transformational rules depend upon the prior application of the phrase-structure rules and have
the effect of converting, or transforming, one phrase marker into another. What is meant by this
statement may be clarified first with reference to a purely abstract and very simple
transformational grammar, in which the letters stand for constituents of a sentence (and S stands
for sentence):
The first five rules are phrase-structure rules (PS rules); rule (6) is a transformational rule (T
rule). The output of rules (1)(5) is the terminal string a + b + c + e + f + d + g + h, which has
associated with it the structural description indicated by the phrase marker shown above. Rule
(6) applies to this terminal string of the PS rules and the associated phrase marker. It has the
effect of deleting C (and the constituents of C) and permuting A and D (together with their
constituents). The result is the string of symbols d + g + h + a + b, with the associated phrase
marker.
One of the principal characteristics of a transformational rule is its transformation of an

underlying phrase marker into a derived phrase marker in this way. Transformational rules, in
contrast with phrase-structure rules, are also formally more heterogeneous and may have more
than one symbol on the left-hand side of the arrow. The linguistic importance of these abstract
considerations may be explained with reference to the relationship that holds in English between
active and passive sentences.
Sciences
Chomskys rule for relating active and passive sentences, shown in Syntactic Structures is very
similar, at first sight, to Harriss, discussed above. Chomskys rule is:
This rule, called the passive transformation, presupposes and depends upon the prior application
of a set of phrase-structure rules. For simplicity, the passive transformation may first be
considered in relation to the set of terminal strings generated by the phrase-structure rules (1)(8)
given earlier. The string the + man + will + hit + the + ball can be treated not as an actual
sentence but as the structure underlying both the active sentence The man will hit the ball and
the corresponding passive The ball will be hit by the man. The passive transformation is
applicable under the condition that the underlying, or input, string is analyzable in terms of its
phrase structure as NP - Aux - V - NP (the use of subscript numerals to distinguish the two NPs
in the formulation of the rule is an informal device for indicating the operation of permutation).
In the phrase marker discussed, the + man are constituents of NP, will is a constituent of
Aux, hit is a constituent of V, and the + ball are constituents of NP. The whole string is
therefore analyzable in the appropriate sense, and the passive transformation converts it into the
string the + ball + will + be + en + hit + by + the + man. A subsequent transformational rule
will permute en + hit to yield hit + en, and one of the morphophonemic rules will then
convert hit + en to hit (as ride + en will be converted to ridden; open + en to
opened, and so on).
Every transformational rule has the effect of converting an underlying phrase marker into a
derived phrase marker. The manner in which the transformational rules assign derived
constituent structure to their input strings is one of the major theoretical problems in the
formalization of transformational grammar. Here it can be assumed not only that be + en is
attached to Aux and by to NP (as indicated by the plus signs in the rule as it has been
formulated above). The phrase marker formalizes the fact, among others, that the ball is the
subject of the passive sentence The ball will be hit by the man, whereas the man is the
subject of the corresponding active The man will hit the ball.
Sciences
Although the example above is a very simple one, and only a single transformational rule has
been considered independently of other transformational rules in the same system, the passive
transformation must operate, not only upon simple noun phrases like the man or the ball, but
upon noun phrases that contain adjectives (the old man), modifying phrases (the man in the
corner), relative clauses (the man who checked in last night), and so forth. The incorporation,
or embedding, of these other structures with the noun phrase will be brought about by the prior
application of other transformational rules. It should also be clear that the phrase-structure rules
require extension to allow for the various forms of the verb (is hitting, hit, was hitting,
has hit, has been hitting, etc.) and for the distinction of singular and plural.
It is important to note that, unlike Harriss theory, Chomskys system of transformational

grammar does not convert one sentence into another: the transformational rules operate upon the
structures underlying sentences and not upon actual sentences. A further point is that even the
simplest sentences (kernel sentences) require the application of at least some transformational
rules. Corresponding active and passive sentences, affirmative and negative sentences,
declarative and interrogative sentences, and so on are formally related by deriving them from the
same underlying terminal string of the phrase-structure component. The difference between
kernel sentences and non-kernel sentences in Syntactic Structures (in a later system of Chomsky
the category of kernel sentences is not given formal recognition at all) resides in the fact that
kernel sentences are generated without the application of any optional transformations. Non-
kernel sentences require the application of both optional and obligatory transformations, and they
differ one from another in that a different selection of optional transformations is made.
Sciences
DO NOT FORGET!
1. The notion of phrase structure may be dealt with independently of its incorporation in a
larger system, such as sentence.
2. In the phrase-structure system of rules, S stands for Sentence, NP for Noun Phrase, VP
for Verb Phrase, Det. for Determiner, Aux for Auxiliary (verb), N for Noun, and V for
Verb stem.
3. A phrase-structure grammar is one that consists entirely of phrase-structure rules,
4. A transformational grammar (as formalized by Chomsky) includes the phrase-structure

and the transformational rules (as well as morphophonemic rules). The transformational
rules depend upon the prior application of the phrase-structure rules and have the effect
of converting, or transforming, one phrase marker into another.
5. Every transformational rule has the effect of converting an underlying phrase marker into
a derived phrase marker. The manner in which the transformational rules assign derived
constituent structure to their input strings is one of the major theoretical problems in the
formalization of transformational grammar.
QUESTION
1. Give the phrase-structure of rules for a simple sentence.
Sciences
UNIT 4
Phrase Structure
Chomskys system of transformational grammar was substantially modified in 1965. Perhaps the
most important modification was the incorporation, within the system, of a semantic component,
in addition to the syntactic component and phonological component. (The phonological
component may be thought of as replacing the morphophonemic component of Syntactic
Structures.) The rules of the syntactic component generate the sentences of the language and
assign to each not one but two structural analyses: a deep structure analysis as represented by the
underlying phrase marker, and a surface structure analysis, as represented by the final derived
phrase marker. The underlying phrase marker is assigned by rules of the base (roughly equivalent
to the PS [Phrase-Structure] rules of the earlier system); the derived phrase marker is assigned by
the transformational rules. The meaning of the sentence is derived (mainly, if not wholly) from
the deep structure by means of the rules of semantic interpretation; the phonetic realization of the
sentence is derived from its surface structure by means of the rules of the phonological
component. The grammar (grammar is now to be understood as covering semantics and
phonology, as well as syntax) is thus an integrated system of rules for relating the pronunciation
of a sentence to its meaning. The syntax, and more particularly the base, is at the heart of the
system, as it were: it is the base component (as the arrows in the diagram indicate) that generates
the infinite class of structures underlying the well-formed sentences of a language. These
structures are then given a semantic and phonetic interpretation by the other components.
The base consists of two parts: a set of category rules and a lexicon. Taken together, they fulfill a
similar function to that fulfilled by the phrase-structure rules of the earlier system. But there are
many differences of detail. Among the most important is that the lexicon (which may be thought
of as a dictionary of the language cast in a particular form) lists, in principle, all the vocabulary
words in the language and associates with each all the syntactic, semantic, and phonological
information required for the correct operation of the rules. This information is represented in
terms of what are called features. For example, the entry for boy might say that it has the
syntactic features: [+ Noun], [+ Count], [+ Common], [+ Animate], and [+ Human]. The
category rules generate a set of phrase markers that have in them, as it were, a number of slots
to be filled with items from the lexicon. With each such slot there is associated a set of features
Sciences
that define the kind of item that can fill the slot. If a phrase marker is generated with a slot
for the head of a noun phrase specified as requiring an animate noun (i.e., a noun having the
feature [+ Animate]), the item boy would be recognized as being compatible with this
specification and could be inserted in the slot by the rule of lexical substitution. Similarly, it
could be inserted in slots specified as requiring a common noun, a human noun, or a countable
noun, but it would be excluded from positions that require an abstract noun (e.g., sincerity) or
an uncountable noun (e.g., water). By drawing upon the syntactic information coded in feature
notation in the lexicon, the category rules might permit such sentences as The boy died, while
excluding (and thereby defining as ungrammatical) such non-sentences as The boy elapsed.
One of the most controversial topics in the development of transformational grammar was the
relationship between syntax and semantics. Scholars working in the field agreed that there is a
considerable degree of interdependence between the two, and the problem was how to formalize
this interdependence. One school of linguists, called generative semanticists, accepted the
general principles of transformational grammar but challenged Chomskys conception of deep
structure as a separate and identifiable level of syntactic representation. In their opinion, the
basic component of the grammar should consist of a set of rules for the generation of well-
formed semantic representations. These would then be converted by a succession of
transformational rules into strings of words with an assigned surface-structure syntactic analysis,
there being no place in the passage from semantic representation to surface structure identifiable
as Chomskys deep structure. Chomsky himself denied that there is any real difference between
the two points of view and has maintained that the issue is purely one of notation. That this
argument could be put forward by one party to the controversy and rejected by the other is
perhaps a sufficient indication of the uncertainty of the evidence. Of greater importance than the
overt issues, in so far as they are clear, was the fact that linguists were now studying much more
intensively than they had in the past the complexities of the interdependence of syntax, on the
one hand, and semantics and logic, on the other.
The role of the phonological component of a generative grammar of the type outlined by
Chomsky is to assign a phonetic interpretation to the strings of words generated by the
syntactic component. These strings of words are represented in a phonological notation (taken
from the lexicon) and have been provided with a surface-structure analysis by the
Sciences
transformational rules. The phonological elements out of which the word forms are composed
are segments consisting of what are referred to technically as distinctive features (following the
usage of the Prague School. For example, the word form man, represented phonologically, is
composed of three segments: the first consists of the features [+ consonantal], [+ bilabial], [+
nasal], etc.; the second of the features [+ vocalic], [+ front], [+ open], etc.; and the third of the
features [+ consonantal], [+ alveolar], [+ nasal], etc. (These features should be taken as purely
illustrative; there is some doubt about the definitive list of distinctive features. They are closer to
what many American structural linguists called morpho-phonemes or the Prague school
linguists labeled archiphonemes, being unspecified for any feature that is contextually
redundant or predictable. For instance, the first segment of the phonological representation of
man will not include the feature [+ voice]; because nasal consonants are always phonetically
voiced in this position in English, the feature [+ voice] can be added to the phonetic specification
by a rule of the phonological component.
One further important aspect of generative phonology (i.e., phonology carried out within the
framework of an integrated generative grammar) should be mentioned: its dependence upon
syntax. Most American structural phonologists made it a point of principle that the phonemic
analysis of an utterance should be carried out without regard to its grammatical structure. This
principle was controversial among American linguists and was not generally accepted outside
America. Not only was the principle rejected by the generative grammarians, but they made the
phonological description of a language much more dependent upon its syntactic analysis than has
any other school of linguists. They claimed, for example, that the phonological rules that assign
different degrees of stress to the vowels in English words and phrases and alter the quality of the
relatively unstressed vowel concomitantly must make reference to the derived constituent
structure of sentences and not merely to the form class of the individual words or the places in
which the word boundaries occur.
DO NOT FORGET!
Sciences
1. The rules of the syntactic component generate the sentences of the language and assign to
each not one but two structural analyses: a deep structure analysis as represented by the
underlying phrase marker, and a surface structure analysis, as represented by the final
derived phrase marker.
2. The phrase marker is assigned by rules of the base (roughly equivalent to the PS [Phrase-
Structure] rules of the earlier system); the derived phrase marker is assigned by the
transformational rules.
3. The meaning of the sentence is derived (mainly, if not wholly) from the deep structure by
means of the rules of semantic interpretation.
4. The phonetic realization of the sentence is derived from its surface structure by means of
the rules of the phonological component.
5. The grammar (grammar is now to be understood as covering semantics and phonology,

as well as syntax) is thus an integrated system of rules for relating the pronunciation of a
sentence to its meaning.
6. The syntax, and more particularly the base, is the base component that generates the
infinite class of structures underlying the well-formed sentences of a language. These
structures are then given a semantic and phonetic interpretation by the other
components.
QUESTION
1. Which are the parts that form the base component of the phrase-structure syntactical
system?
UNIT 5
Sciences
The Hierarchy of Grammatical Levels
Every language is said to be tri-modal i.e., structured in three modes: phonology, grammar,
and lexicon. These modes are interrelated but have a considerable degree of independence and
must be described in their own terms. Phonology and lexicon should not be seen as mere
appendages to grammar, the former simply specifying which phonemes can combine to form
morphemes (or morphs), and the latter simply listing the morphemes and other meaningful units
with a description of their meaning. There are levels of structure in each of the modes, and the
units of one level are not necessarily coterminous with those of another. Phonemes, for example,
may combine to form syllables and syllables to form phonological words (phonological word
is defined as the domain of some phonological process such as accentuation, assimilation, or
dissimilation), but the morpheme (or morph) will not necessarily consist of an integral number of
syllables, still less of a single syllable. Nor will the word as a grammatical unit necessarily
coincide with the phonological word. Similarly, the units of lexical analysis, sometimes referred
to as lexemes (in one sense of this term), are not necessarily identifiable as single grammatical
units, whether as morphemes, words, or phrases. No priority, then, is ascribed to any one of the
three modes.
The Grammatical Levels
Within the grammar of a language there is a hierarchy of levels, units of one level being
composed of sequences of units of the level below. In many languages, five such levels are
recognized, defined in terms of the following units: morpheme, word, phrase, clause, and
sentence. (The term level is being used in a different sense from that in which it was used earlier
to refer to phonology and grammar.) The difference between morphology and syntax is simply a
difference between two of these five levels, no greater than the difference, for example, between
the phrase level and the clause level. It is also possible for there to be loop-backs in the
grammatical hierarchy of a language. This means that a unit of higher level may be embedded
within the structure of a unit of lower level; for example, a clause may fill a slot within a phrase
(e.g., who arrived late, in the man who arrived late).
Sciences
This system of analysis is called a stratificational system because it is based upon the notion that
every language comprises a restricted number of structural layers or strata, hierarchically related
in such a way that units or combinations of units on one stratum realize units or combinations of
units of the next higher stratum. The number of strata may vary from language to language. Four
strata have been recognized for English, and it is probable that all languages may have at least
these four: the sememic, the lexemic, the morphemic, and the phonemic strata. The sememic
stratal system constitutes the semiology of the language; the lexemic and morphemic stratal
systems constitute the grammar (in the narrower sense of this term); and the phonemic system
constitutes the phonology. In some later stratificational work, the term grammar covers the three
higher stratal systemsthe sememic, the lexemic, and the morphemicand is opposed to
phonology. The deep structure of sentences is described on the sememic stratum and the
surface structure on the morphemic. In the present account, grammar is used in the narrower
sense and will be opposed to semiology as well as phonology.
The originality of stratificational grammar does not reside in the recognition of these three major
components of a linguistic description. The stratificational approach to linguistic description is
distinguished from others in that it relates grammar to semiology and phonology by means of the
same notion of realization that it employs to relate the lexemic and the morphemic stratal
systems within the grammatical component. Another distinguishing feature of stratificational
grammar, in its later development at least, is its description of linguistic structure in terms of a
network of relationships, rather than by means of a system of rules; linguistic units are said to be
nothing more than points, or positions, in the relational network.
Inter-stratal Relationships
One of the principal characteristics of the stratificational approach is that it sets out to describe
languages without making use of rules that convert one entity into another. (Reference has been
made above to the antipathy many linguists have felt towards describing languages in terms of
processes.) The stratificationalist would handle the phenomena in terms of the inter-stratal
relationships of realization. Various kinds of inter-stratal relationships, other than that of one-to-
one correspondence may be recognized: diversification, in which one higher unit has alternative
realizations; zero realization, in which a higher unit has no overt realization on the lower stratum;
neutralization, in which two or more higher units are mapped into the same lower level unit; and
Sciences
so on. All these inter-stratal one-many or many-one relations are then analyzed in terms of the
logical notions of conjunction and disjunction (AND-relations versus OR-relations), of ordering
(x precedes y in an AND-relationship, x is selected in preference to y in an OR-relationship), and
the directionality (upward towards meaning, or downward towards sound). Many of the
phenomena that are described by other linguists in terms of processes that derive one unit from
another can be described elegantly enough in terms of inter-stratal relationships of this kind.
Sciences
DO NOT FORGET!
1. Within the grammar of a language there is a hierarchy of levels, units of one level being
composed of sequences of units of the level below. In many languages, five such levels
are recognized, defined in terms of the following units: morpheme, word, phrase, clause,
and sentence.
2. This system of analysis is called a stratificational system because it is based upon the
notion that every language comprises a restricted number of structural layers or strata,
hierarchically related in such a way that units or combinations of units on one stratum
realize units or combinations of units of the next higher stratum. The number of strata
may vary from language to language.
QUESTIONS
1. Which is the difference between morphology and syntax?
2. How many strata are in the English language?
Sciences
UNIT 6
Phrase Structure Grammar
A Diachronic Perspective
The Prague School
What is now generally referred to as the Prague school comprised a fairly large group of
scholars, mainly European, who, though they may not themselves have been members of the
Linguistic Circle of Prague, derived their inspiration from the work of Vilem Mathesius, Nikolay
Trubetskoy, Roman Jakobson and other scholars based in Prague in the decade preceding World
War II.
The Combination of Structuralism and Functionalism
The most characteristic feature of the Prague school approach is its combination of structuralism
with functionalism. The latter term (like structuralism) has been used in a variety of senses in
linguistics. Here it is to be understood as implying an appreciation of the diversity of functions
fulfilled by language and a theoretical recognition that the structure of languages is in large part
determined by their characteristic functions. Functionalism, taken in this sense, manifests itself
in many of the more particular tenets of Prague school doctrine.
One very famous functional analysis of language, which, though it did not originate in Prague,
was very influential there, was that of the German psychologist Karl Buhler, who recognized
three general kinds of function fulfilled by language: Darstellungsfunktion, Kundgabefunktion,
and Appelfunktion. These terms may be translated, in the present context, as the cognitive, the
expressive, and the conative (or instrumental) functions. The cognitive function of language
refers to its employment for the transmission of factual information; by expressive function is
meant the indication of the mood or attitude of the speaker (or writer); and by the conative
function of language is meant its use for influencing the person one is addressing or for bringing
about some practical effect. A number of scholars working in the Prague tradition suggested that
these three functions correlate in many languages, at least partly, with the grammatical categories
of mood and person. The cognitive function is fulfilled characteristically by 3rd-person non-
modal utterances (i.e., utterances in the indicative mood, making no use of modal verbs); the
Sciences
expressive function by 1st-person utterances in the subjunctive or optative mood; and the
conative function by 2nd-person utterances in the imperative. The functional distinction of the
cognitive and the expressive aspects of language there was also applied by the Prague school
linguists in their work on stylistics and literary criticism. One of their key principles was that
language is being used poetically or aesthetically when the expressive aspect is predominant, and
that it is typical of the expressive function of language that this should be manifest in the form of
an utterance and not merely in the meanings of the component words.
Chomskys Transformational Theory
Chomskys theories are transformational in the sense that they account for the syntactic and
semantic properties of sentences by means of modifications of the structure of a phrase in the
course of its generation. The standard theory of Syntactic Structures and especially of Aspects of
the Theory of Syntax employed a phrase-structure grammara grammar in which the syntactic
elements of a language are defined by means of rewrite rules that specify their smaller
constituents (e.g., S NP + VP, or a sentence may be rewritten as a noun phrase and a verb
phrase)a large number of obligatory and optional transformations, and two levels of
structure: a deep structure, where semantic interpretation takes place, and a surface structure,
where phonetic interpretation takes place. These early grammars were difficult to contrive.
In Chomskys later theories, deep structure ceased to be the locus of semantic interpretation.
Phrase-structure grammars too were virtually eliminated by the end of the 1970s; the task they
performed was taken over by the operation of projecting individual lexical items and their
properties into more complex structures by means of X-bar theory. Transformations during this
transitional period were reduced to a single operation, Move (Move alpha), which
amounted to move any element in a derivation anywherealbeit within a system of robust
constraints. Following the introduction of the minimalist program (MP) in the early 1990s,
deep structure (and surface structure) disappeared altogether. Move , and thus modification of
structure from one derivational step to another, was replaced by Move and later by internal
Merge, a variant of external Merge, itself a crucial basic operation that takes two elements
(such as words) and makes of them a set. In the early 21st century, internal and external Merge,
along with parameters and micro-parameters, remained at the core of Chomskys efforts to
construct grammars.
Sciences
Throughout the development of these approaches to the science of language, there were
continual improvements in simplicity and formal elegance in the theories on offer; the early
phrase-structure components, transformational components, and deep and surface structures were
all eliminated, replaced by much simpler systems. Indeed, an MP grammar for a specific
language could in principle consist entirely of Merge (internal and external) together with some
parametric settings. MP aims to achieve both of the major original goals that Chomsky set for a
theory of language in Aspects of the Theory of Syntax: that it be descriptively adequate, in the
sense that the grammars it provides generate all and only the grammatical expressions of the
language in question, and that it be explanatorily adequate, in the sense that it provides a
descriptively adequate grammar for any natural language as represented in the mind of a given
individual. MP grammars explained how any individual readily acquires what Chomsky calls an
I-languageI for internal, individual, and intensional (that is, described by a grammar). But
they also speak to other desiderata of a natural science: they are much simpler, and they are much
more easily accommodated to another science, namely biology.
DO NOT FORGET!
Sciences
1. The most characteristic feature of the Prague school approach is its combination of
structuralism with functionalism. The latter term has been used in a variety of senses in
linguistics. Here it is to be understood as implying an appreciation of the diversity of
functions fulfilled by language and a theoretical recognition that the structure of
languages is in large part determined by their characteristic functions. Functionalism,
taken in this sense, manifests itself in many of the more particular tenets of Prague school
doctrine.
2. Chomskys theories are transformational in the sense that they account for the syntactic
and semantic properties of sentences by means of modifications of the structure of a
phrase in the course of its generation.
3. The standard theory of Syntactic Structures and especially of Aspects of the Theory of
Syntax employed a phrase-structure grammara grammar in which the syntactic
elements of a language are defined by means of rewrite rules that specify their smaller
constituents.
4. In Chomskys later theories, deep structure ceased to be the locus of semantic

interpretation.
QUESTION
1. Who are the main representatives of the Prague School?
UNIT 7
Sciences
Surface Structure and Deep Structure
One of the most important concepts proposed by Chomsky is the concept of surface and deep
structure. The Generative paradigm claims that the concept of structural analysis proposed by
Structuralism paradigm is too swallow, it only reaches the level of surface structure. Surface
structure can be defined as the syntactic form they take as actual sentences. In the other words, it
is formed of sentences resulted from modification / transformation. Consider these sentences:
(1) You close the door.
(2) The door is closed by you.
(3) Close the door!
The first sentence is active, second is passive, and the last is imperative. However, if you take a
look those closely, you will find that those three are very closely related, even identical. They
seem to be identical, since they have the same abstract representation that is called deep
structure. It is defined as an abstract level of structural organization in which all the elements
determining structural interpretation are represented. If you want to analyze the relation of those
three sentences, the first you have to know about the deep structure of them, since deep structure
is the input of transformation rules. We cannot apply transformation rules if you dont
have deep structure. Transformation rules are sets of rules which will change or move
constituents in the structures derive from the phrase structure rules.
The DS (deep structure)
Sciences
(2)
SD (structure description) : 1234
SC (Structural change) : 3 4 + be 2+en 1

SS (Surface structure) :
The door is closed by you
Note: the SC is passive transformation rules
(3) SD: 1234
SC: 0234
SS: Close the door!

Note: 0 is deletion
From the above example, it can be concluded that deep structure then is a pure representation of
thematic relations. Anything which is interpreted as the subject or object of a given predicate will
be in the subject or object position of that predicate at Deep structure no matter where it is found
at Surface structure.
DO NOT FORGET!
Sciences
1. Surface structure can be defined as the syntactic form that takes the actual sentences. In
the other words, it is formed of sentences resulted from modification / transformation.
2. The deep structure also has an abstract representation. It is defined as an abstract level of
structural organization in which all the elements determining structural interpretation are
represented.
QUESTION
1. What are the transformation rules?
UNIT 8
Sciences
Noun Phrase
A noun phrase or nominal phrase (abbreviated NP) is a phrase which has a noun (or an
indefinite pronoun) as its head word, or which performs the same grammatical function as such a
phrase. Noun phrases are very common cross-linguistically, and they may be the most frequently
occurring phrase type.
Noun phrases often function as verb subject and object, as predicative expressions, and as the
complements of prepositions. Noun phrases can be embedded inside each other; for instance, the
noun phrase some of his constituents contains the shorter noun phrase his constituents.
In some modern theories of grammar, noun phrases with determiners are analyzed as having the
determiner rather than the noun as their head; they are then referred to as determiner phrase.
The Status of a Single Word as a Phrase
Traditionally, a phrase is understood to contain two or more words. The traditional progression in
the size of syntactic units is word < phrase < clause, and in this approach a single word (such as
a noun or pronoun) would not be referred to as a phrase. However, many modern schools of
syntax especially those that have been influenced by X-bar theory make no such
restriction. Here many single words are judged to be phrases based on a desire for theory-internal
consistency. A phrase is deemed to be a word or a combination of words that appears in a set
syntactic position, for instance in subject position or object position.
On this understanding of phrases, the nouns and pronouns in bold in the following sentences are
noun phrases (rather than just nouns and pronouns):
a. He saw someone.
b. Milk is good.
c. They spoke about corruption.
The words in bold are called phrases since they appear in the syntactic positions where multiple-
word phrases (i.e. traditional phrases) can appear. This practice takes the constellation to be
Sciences
primitive rather than the words themselves. The word he, for instance, functions as a pronoun,
but within the sentence it also functions as a noun phrase. The phrase structure grammars of the
Chomsky tradition are primary examples of theories that apply this understanding of phrases.
Other grammars, for instance dependency grammars, are likely to reject this approach to phrases,
since they take the words themselves to be primitive. For them, phrases must contain two or
more words.
Components of a Noun Phrase
A typical noun phrase consists of a noun (the head of the phrase) together with zero or more
modifiers of various types. The chief types of these modifiers are:
Determiners, such as the, this, my, some
Attributive adjectives, such as large, beautiful, sweeter
Adjective phrase and participial phrases, such as extremely large, hard as nails, made of
wood, sitting on the step
Noun adjuncts, such as college in the noun phrase a college student
Prepositional phrases, such as in the drawing room, of his aunt
Relative clauses, such as which we noticed
Other clauses serving as complements to the noun, such as that God exists in the noun phrase the
belief that God exists
Infinitive phrases, such as to sing well and to beat in the noun phrases a desire to sing
well and the man to beat
The form and position of these elements depend on the syntax of the language in question. In
English, determiners, adjectives (and some adjective phrases) and noun modifiers precede the
head noun, whereas the heavier units phrases and clauses generally follow it. This is part of a
strong tendency in English to place heavier constituents to the right, making English more of
a head-initial language. Head-final languages (e.g. Japanese and Turkish) are more likely to
Sciences
place all modifiers before the head noun. Other languages, such as French, often place even
single-word adjectives after the noun.
Syntactic Function
Noun phrases typically bear argument functions. That is, the syntactic functions that they fulfill
are those of the arguments of the main clause predicate, particularly those of subject, object and
predicative expression. They also function as arguments in such constructs as participial
phrases and prepositional phrases. For example:
For us the news is a concern. - The news is the subject argument
Have you heard the news? - The news is the object argument
That is the news. - The news is the predicative expression following the copula is
They are talking about the news. - The news is the argument in the prepositional phrase about the
news
The man reading the news is very tall. - The news is the object argument in the participial
phrase reading the news
Sometimes a noun phrase can also function as an adjunct of the main clause predicate, thus
taking on an adverbial function, e.g.
Most days I read the newspaper.
She has been studying all night.
Noun Phrases With and Without Determiners
In some languages, including English, noun phrases are required to be "completed" with
a determiner in many contexts, and thus a distinction is made in syntactic analysis between
phrases that have received their required determiner (such as the big house), and those in which
the determiner is lacking (such as big house).
Sciences
The situation is complicated by the fact that in some contexts a noun phrase may nonetheless be
used without a determiner (as in I like big houses); in this case the phrase may be described as
having a "null determiner".
In the original X-bar theory, the two respective types of entity are called noun phrase (NP) and
N-bar (N, N). Thus in the sentence Here is the big house, both house and big house are N-
bars, while the big house is a noun phrase. In the sentence I like big houses, both houses and big
houses are N-bars, but big houses also functions as a noun phrase (in this case without an explicit
determiner).
Tree Representations of the Noun Phrase
The representation of noun phrases using parse trees depends on the basic approach to syntactic
structure adopted. The layered trees of many phrase structure grammars grant noun phrases an
intricate structure that acknowledges a hierarchy of functional projections. Dependency
grammars, in contrast, since the basic architecture of dependency places a major limitation on the
amount of structure that the theory can assume, produce simple, relatively flat structures for noun
phrases.
The representation also depends on whether the noun or the determiner is taken to be the head of
the phrase.
Below are some possible trees for the two noun phrases the big house and big houses (as in the
sentences Here is the big house and I like big houses).
Sciences
1. Phrase-structure trees, first using the original X-bar theory, then using the modern DP
approach:
NP NP | DP DP
/ \ | | / \ |
Det. N' N' | det. NP NP
| / \ / \ | | / \ / \
the adj. N' adj. N' | the adj adj NP
| | | | | | | | |
big N big N | big N big N
| | | | |
house houses | house houses
2. Dependency trees, first using the traditional NP approach, then using the DP approach:
house houses | the (null)
/ / / | \ \
/ / big | house houses
the big | / /
| big big
The following trees represent a more complex phrase. For simplicity, only dependency-based
trees are given.
Sciences
The first tree is based on the traditional assumption that nouns, rather than determiners, are the
heads of phrases.
The head noun picture has the four dependents the, old, of Fred, and that I found in the drawer.
The tree shows how the lighter dependents appear as pre-dependents (preceding their head) and
the heavier ones as post-dependents (following their head).
The second tree assumes the DP hypothesis, namely that determiners rather than nouns serve as
phrase heads.
The determiner the is now depicted as the head of the entire phrase, thus making the phrase a
determiner phrase.
Sciences
DO NOT FORGET!
1. A noun phrase or nominal phrase (abbreviated NP) is a phrase which has a noun (or an
indefinite pronoun) as its head word, or which performs the same grammatical function
as such a phrase. Noun phrases are very common cross-linguistically, and they may be
the most frequently
2. A typical noun phrase consists of a noun (the head of the phrase) together with zero or
more modifiers of various types.
3. Noun phrases typically bear argument functions. That is, the syntactic functions that they
fulfill are those of the arguments of the main clause predicate, particularly those
of subject, object and predicative expression. They also function as arguments in such
constructs as participial phrases and prepositional phrases.
QUESTION
1. Which are the main modifiers of a NP?
Sciences
UNIT 9
Verb Phrase
In linguistics, a verb phrase or VP is a syntactic unit composed of at least one verb and the
dependents of that verb object, complements and other modifiers, but not including the subject.
Thus in the sentence A fat man put the jewels quickly in the box, the words put the jewels
quickly in the box may be considered a verb phrase this consists of the verb put and its
dependents, but not its subject a fat man. A verb phrase is therefore similar to what is considered
a predicate in some contexts.
Verb phrases may be either finite (based on a finite verb) or non-finite (based on a non-finite
verb, such as an infinitive, participle or gerund). While phrase structure acknowledge both types
of VP, dependency grammars reject the existence of a finite VP constituent (unlike the former,
they regard the subject as being among the verb's dependents). In this regard, the understanding
of verb phrases can be dependent on which theory is being considered.
Verb Phrases in Phrase Structure Grammars
In phrase structure grammars such as generative grammar, the VP is a phrase that is headed by
a verb. A verb phrase may be constructed from a single verb; often, however, the verb phrase will
consist of various combinations of the main verb and any auxiliary verbs, plus
optional specifiers, complements, and adjuncts. For example:
Yankee batters hit the ball to win their first World Series since 2000.
Mary saw the man through the window.
David gave Mary a book.
The first example contains the verb phrase hit the ball to win their first World Series since 2000.
The second example contains the main verb saw, the noun phrase (NP) complement the man, and
the prepositional phrase (PP) adjunct through the window, which together form the verb phrase.
Additionally, the third example contains the main verb gave, and two noun phrases Mary and a
book, both selected by the verb in this case. All three together form the verb phrase. Note that
according to this definition, the verb phrase corresponds to the predicate of traditional grammar.
Sciences
Up to the mid/late 1980s, some work in phrase structure grammars thought that some languages
lacked a verb phrase. These included languages with extremely free order of the words (so-
called non-configurational languages, such as Japanese, Hungarian, or Australian aboriginal
languages), and languages with a default VSO order (several Celtic and Oceanic languages). The
current view in some varieties of generative grammar (such as Principles and Parameters) is that
all languages have a verb phrase, while others (such as Lexical Functional Grammar) take the
view that at least some of these languages do lack a verb phrase constituent.
Finally, phrase structure grammars do not draw the key distinction between finite verb phrases
and non-finite verb phrases, since they view both as constituent phrases. Dependency grammars
(as described in the following section) are much different in this regard.
Verb Phrases in Dependency Grammars
While phrase structure grammars (= constituency grammars) acknowledge both finite and non-
finite VPs as constituents (= sub-trees), dependency grammars reject the former. That is,
dependency grammars acknowledge only non-finite VPs as constituents; finite VPs do not
qualify as constituents in dependency grammars. For example:
John has finished the work. - Finite VP in bold
John has finished the work. - Non-finite VP in bold
Since has finished the work contains the finite verb has, it is a finite VP, and since finished the
work contains the non-finite verb finished but lacks a finite verb, it is a non-finite VP. Similar
examples:
They do not want to try that. - Finite VP in bold
They do not want to try that. - One non-finite VP in bold
They do not want to try that. - Another non-finite VP in bold
These examples illustrate well that many clauses can contain more than one non-finite VP, but
they generally contain only one finite VP. Starting with Lucien Tesniere 1959, dependency
grammars challenge the validity of the initial binary division of the clause into subject (NP)
Sciences
and predicate (VP), which means they reject the notion that the second half of this binary
division, i.e. the finite VP, is a constituent. They do, however, readily acknowledge the existence
of non-finite VPs as constituents. The two competing views of verb phrases are visible in the
following trees:
The constituency tree on the left shows the finite VP has finished the work as a constituent, since
it corresponds to a sub-tree. The dependency tree on the right, in contrast, does not acknowledge
a finite VP constituent, since there is no sub-tree there that corresponds to has finished the
work. Note that the analyses agree concerning the non-finite VP finished the work; both see it
as a constituent (= sub-tree).
Dependency grammars point to the results of many standard constituency tests to back up their
stance. For instance, topicalization, pseudo-clefting, and answer ellipsis suggest that non-finite
VP does, but finite VP does not, exist as a constituent:
*...and has finished the work, John. - Topicalization
*What John has done is has finished the work. - Pseudoclefting
What has John done? - *Has finished the work. - Answer ellipsis
The * indicates that the sentence is bad. These data must be compared to the results for non-finite
VP: () and finished the work, John (certainly) has. - Topicalization
What John has done is finished the work. - Pseudoclefting
Sciences
What has John done? - Finished the work. - Answer ellipsis
The strings that are in bold are the ones in focus. Attempts to in some sense isolate the finite VP
fail, but the same attempts with the non-finite VP succeed.
Verb Phrase
Verb phrases are sometimes defined more narrowly in scope to allow for only those sentence
elements that are strictly considered verbal elements to form verb phrases. According to such a
definition, verb phrases consist only of main verbs, auxiliary verbs, and
other infinite or participle constructions. For example, in the following sentences only the words
in bold would be considered to form the verb phrase for each sentence:
John has given Mary a book.
They were being eaten alive.
She kept screaming like a maniac.
Thou shall not kill.
This more narrow definition is often applied in functionalist frameworks and traditional
European reference grammars. It is incompatible with the phrase structure understanding of the
verb phrase, since the strings in bold are not constituents under standard analyses. It is, however,
compatible with those grammars, in particular dependency grammars. Furthermore, the verbal
elements that are in bold are syntactic units consistent with the understanding of predicates in the
tradition of the predicate calculus.
Sciences
DO NOT FORGET!
1. In linguistics, a verb phrase or VP is a syntactic unit composed of at least one verb and
the dependents of that verb object, complements and other modifiers, but not including
the subject.
2. Verb phrases may be either finite (based on a finite verb) or non-finite (based on a non-
finite verb, such as an infinitive, participle or gerund). The phrase structure grammar
acknowledges both types.
3. In phrase structure grammars such as generative grammar, the VP is a phrase that

is headed by a verb. A verb phrase may be constructed from a single verb; often,
however, the verb phrase will consist of various combinations of the main verb and
any auxiliary verbs, plus optional specifiers, complements, and adjuncts.
4. While phrase structure grammars (= constituency grammars) acknowledge

both finite and non-finite VPs as constituents (= sub-trees), dependency grammars reject
the former. That is, dependency grammars acknowledge only non-finite VPs as
constituents; finite VPs do not qualify as constituents in dependency grammars.
QUESTION
1. To what does a VP correspond in traditional grammar?
Sciences
UNIT 10
Adjective Phrase
An adjective phrase (or adjectival phrase) is a phrase whose head word is an adjective, e.g. fond
of steak, very happy, quite upset about it, etc. The adjective in an adjective phrase can initiate the
phrase (e.g. fond of steak), conclude the phrase (e.g. very happy), or appear in a medial position
(e.g. quite upset about it). The dependents of the head adjective - i.e. the other words and phrases
inside the adjective phrase - are typically adverbs or prepositional phrases, but they can also
be clauses (e.g. louder than you do). Adjectives and adjective phrases function in two basic ways
in clauses, either attributively or predicatively. When they are attributive, they appear inside a
noun phrase and modify that noun phrase, and when they are predicative, they appear outside of
the noun phrase that they modify and typically follow a linking verb (copula).
The adjective phrases are underlined in the following example sentences, the head adjective in
each of these phrases is in bold, and how the adjective phrase is functioningattributively or
predicativelyis stated to the right of each example.
a. Sentences can contain tremendously long phrases. - Attributive adjective phrase
b. This sentence is not tremendously long. - Predicative adjective phrase
a. A player faster than you was on their team. - Attributive adjective phrase
b. He is faster than you. - Predicative adjective phrase
a. Sam ordered a very spicy but quite small pizza. - Attributive adjective phrases
b. The pizza is very spicy but quite small. - Predicative adjective phrases
a. People angry with the high prices were protesting. - Attributive adjective phrase
b. The people are angry with the high prices. - Predicative adjective phrase
The distinguishing characteristic of an attributive adjective phrase is that it appears inside the
noun phrase that it modifies. An interesting trait of these phrases in English is that an attributive
adjective alone generally precedes the noun, e.g. a proud man, whereas a head-initial or head-
Sciences
medial adjective phrase follows its noun, e.g. a man proud of his children. A predicative
adjective (phrase), in contrast, appears outside of the noun phrase that it modifies, usually after a
linking verb, e.g. The man is proud.
Adjective Phrase and Adjectival Phrase
The term adjectival phrase is sometimes used instead of adjective phrase. However, there is
tendency to call a phrase an adjectival phrase in such a case where that phrase is functioning like
an adjective phrase would, but does not contain an actual adjective. For example, in Mr. Clinton
is a man of wealth, the prepositional phrase of wealth modifies a man the way an adjective
would, and it could be reworded with an adjective, e.g. Mr. Clinton is a wealthy man.
Similarly, that boy is friendless (an adjective friendless modifies the noun boy) and That boy is
without a friend (a prepositional phrase without a friend modifies boy).
Similarly, the term adjectival phrase is commonly used for any phrase in attributive position,
whether it is technically an adjective phrase, noun phrase, or prepositional phrase. These may be
more precisely distinguished as phrasal attributives or attributive phrases. This definition is
commonly used in English style guides for writing, where the terms attributive and adjective are
frequently treated as synonyms, because attributive phrases are typically hyphenated, whereas
predicative phrases generally are not, despite both modifying a noun.
Tree Diagrams
The structure of adjective phrases (and of all other phrase types) is often represented using tree
structures. There are two modern conventions for doing this, constituency-based trees of phrase
structure grammars and dependency-based trees of dependency grammars. Both types of trees
are produced here. The following trees illustrate head-final adjective phrases, i.e. adjective
phrases that have their head adjective on the right side of the phrase: head final adjective phrase.
Sciences
The labels on the nodes in the trees are acronyms: A = adjective, Adv = adverb, AP = adjective
phrase, N = noun/pronoun, P = preposition, PP = prepositional phrase. The constituency trees
identify these phrases as adjective phrases by labeling the top node with AP, and the dependency
trees accomplish the same thing by positioning the A node at the top of the tree. The following
trees illustrate the structure of head-initial adjective phrases, i.e. adjective phrases that have their
head on the left side of the phrase:
And the following trees illustrate the structure of head-medial adjective phrases:
Sciences
The important aspect of these tree structures - regardless of whether one uses constituency or
dependency to show the structure of phrases - is that they are identified as adjective phrases by
the label on the top node of each tree.
Sciences
DO NOT FORGET!
1. An adjective phrase (or adjectival phrase) is a phrase whose head word is an adjective,
e.g. fond of steak, very happy, quite upset about it, etc.
2. The adjective in an adjective phrase can initiate the phrase (e.g. fond of steak), conclude
the phrase (e.g. very happy), or appear in a medial position (e.g. quite upset about it).
3. The term adjectival phrase is sometimes used instead of adjective phrase. However, there
is tendency to call a phrase an adjectival phrase in such a case where that phrase is
functioning like an adjective phrase would, but does not contain an actual adjective,
while the adjective phrase actually contains an adjective.
4. Similarly, the term adjectival phrase is commonly used for any phrase
in attributive position, whether it is technically an adjective phrase, noun phrase,
or prepositional phrase. These may be more precisely distinguished as phrasal
attributives or attributive phrases.
QUESTION
1. Which is the syntactic function of the adjective or adjectival phrases?
Sciences
UNIT 11
Ad-positional Phrase
The term "ad-positional phrase" is defined in linguistics as a syntactic category that includes pre-
positional phrases, post-positional phrases, and circum-positional phrases. Ad-positional phrases
contain an ad-position (preposition, postposition, or circum-position) as head and usually
a complement such as a noun phrase. Language syntax treats ad-positional phrases as units that
act as arguments or adjuncts. Prepositional and postpositional phrases differ by the order of the
words used. Languages that are primarily head-initial such as English predominantly use
prepositional phrases, whereas head-final languages predominantly employ postpositional
phrases. Many languages have both types, as well as circum-positional phrases.
Types of Ad-positional Phrases
There are three types of ad-positional phrases: prepositional phrases, postpositional phrases, and
circum-positional phrases. These three types are illustrated in the subsections that follow:
Prepositional Phrases
The underlined phrases in the following sentences are examples of prepositional phrases in
English. The prepositions are in bold:
a. *She walked around his desk.
b. Ryan could see her in the room.
c. David walked on top of the building.
d. They walked up the stairs.
e. Philip ate in the kitchen.
Prepositional phrases have a preposition as the central element of the phrase, i.e. as the head of
the phrase. The remaining part of the phrase, usually a noun (phrase) or pronoun, is sometimes
called the prepositional complement.
Sciences
Postpositional Phrases
Postpositional elements are frequent in head-final languages such as Basque, Estonian, Finnish,
Korean, Japanese, Hindi, Urdu, Georgian and Bengali. The word or other morpheme that
corresponds to an English preposition occurs after its complement, hence the name postposition.
While English is generally seen as lacking postpositions entirely, there are a couple of words that
one can in fact view as postpositions, e.g. the crisis two years ago, sleep the whole night through.
Since a phrase like two years ago distributes just like a prepositional phrase, one can argue
that ago should be classified as a postposition, as opposed to as an adjective or adverb.
Circum-positional Phrases
Circum-positional phrases involve both a preposition and a postposition, whereby the

complement appears between the two. Circum-positions are common in Pashto and Kurdish.
English has at least one circum-positional construction, e.g.
a. From now on, he won't help.
German has more of them, e.g.
b. Von mir aus kannst du das machen.
From me out can you that do = 'As far as I'm concerned, you can do it.'
c. Um der Freundschaft willen sollst du es machen.
Around the friendship sake should you it does = 'For the sake of friendship, you should do it.'
Representing Ad-positional Phrases
Like with all other types of phrases, theories of syntax render the syntactic structure of ad-
positional phrases using trees. The trees that follow represent ad-positional phrases according to
two modern conventions for rendering sentence structure, first in terms of the constituency
relation of phrase structure grammars and then in terms of the dependency relation
of dependency grammars. The following labels are used on the nodes in the trees: Adv = adverb,
Sciences
N = nominal (noun or pronoun), P = preposition / postposition, and PP = pre/postpositional

phrase.
These phrases are identified as prepositional phrases by the placement of PP at the top of the
constituency trees and of P at the top of the dependency trees. English also has a number of two-
part prepositional phrases, i.e. phrases that can be viewed as containing two prepositions, e.g.
Assuming that ago in English is indeed a postposition as suggested above, a typical ago-phrase
would receive the following structural analyses:
Sciences
The analysis of circum-positional phrases is not so clear, since it is not obvious which of the two
ad-positions should be viewed as the head of the phrase. However, the following analyses are
more in line with the fact that English is primarily a head-initial language:
Distribution and Function
The next two subsections consider the distribution and function of prepositional phrases in
English. The term distribution denotes the environments in a syntactic unit can appear.
Distribution
The distribution of prepositional phrases in English can be characterized in terms of heads and
dependents. Prepositional phrases typically appear as post-dependents of nouns, adjectives, and
finite and non-finite verbs, although they can also appear as pre-dependents of finite verbs, for
instance when they initiate clauses. For ease of presentation, just dependency trees are now
employed to illustrate these points. The following trees show prepositional phrases as post-
dependents of nouns and adjectives:
Sciences
And the following trees show prepositional phrases as post-dependents of non-finite verbs and as
pre-dependents of finite verbs:
The attempts to position a prepositional phrase in front of its head noun, adjective, or non-finite
verb are bad, e.g.
a. his departure on Tuesday
b. *his on Tuesday departure
a. proud of his grade
b. *of his grade proud
a. He is leaving on Tuesday.
b. *He is on Tuesday leaving.
The b-examples demonstrate that prepositional phrases in English prefer to appear as post-
dependents of their heads. The fact that they appear as pre-dependents of their head (as in the
finite clauses above) is curious.
Function
Sciences
More often than not, a given ad-positional phrase is an adjunct in the clause or noun phrase that
it appears. These phrases can also, however, function as arguments, in which case they are
known as oblique:
a. She ran under him. - Adjunct at the clause level
b. The man from China was enjoying his noodles. - Adjunct in a noun phrase.
c. He gave money to the cause. - Oblique argument at the clause level
d. She argued with him. - Oblique Argument at the clause level
e. A student of physics attended. - Argument in a noun phrase
Particles in the Prepositional Phrases
A prepositional phrase should not be confused with a sequence formed by the particle and the
direct object of a phrasal verb. Phrasal verbs often consist of a verb and a particle, whereby the
particle is mistakenly interpreted to be a preposition, e.g.
a. He turned on the light. - ON is a particle, not a preposition
b. He turned it on. - Shifting identifies ON as a particle
a. She made up a story. - UP is a particle, not a preposition
b. She made it up. - Shifting identifies UP as a particle
a. They put off the party. - OFF is a particle, not a preposition
b. They put it off. - Shifting identifies OFF as a particle.
Particles are identified by shifting i.e. the particle can switch places with the object when the
object is a pronoun. Prepositions cannot do this, i.e. they cannot switch positions with their
complement, e.g. He is relying on Susan vs. *He is relying her on.
Adverb Phrases
Sciences
Adverb phrases are the first grammatical forms that appear within adjective phrases in the
English language. Notational grammars define adverbs as words that describes verbs and
adjectives. An adverb phrase is a phrase in which an adverb functions as the head plus any other
adverbs functioning as adverb phrase modifiers. Adverbs perform the grammatical function of
adjective phrase modifier within adjective phrases. For example, the following italicized adverb
phrases function as adjective phrase modifiers within adjective phrases:
Somewhat grumpy
Smartly chic
Rather annoyingly loud
Quite shockingly pink
Adverb phrases always precede the adjective within an adjective phrase.
DO NOT FORGET!
1. The term "ad-positional phrase" is defined in linguistics as a syntactic category that

includes pre-positional phrases, post-positional phrases, and circum-positional phrases.
2. Ad-positional phrases contain an ad-position (preposition, postposition, or circum-

position) as head and usually a complement such as a noun phrase.
Sciences
3. The distribution of prepositional phrases in English can be characterized in terms of

heads and dependents. Prepositional phrases typically appear as post-dependents of
nouns, adjectives, and finite and non-finite verbs, although they can also appear as pre-
dependents of finite verbs, for instance when they initiate clauses.
4. More often than not, a given ad-positional phrase is an adjunct in the clause or noun
phrase that it appears. These phrases can also, however, function as arguments.
5. An adverb phrase is a phrase in which an adverb functions as the head plus any other
adverbs functioning as adverb phrase modifiers.
QUESTION
1. Which is the function that the adverbs may perform within an Adjective Phrase?
Answer Key
Unit 1
1. The generative transformational grammar was first proposed in 1950s.
2. Noam Chomsky was the linguist who proposed the generative transformational grammar.
Unit 2
Sciences
1. The smaller forms of a sentence or phrase into which a larger form may be analyzed are
called the constituents, and the larger form which includes these constituents is called a
syntactical construction.
2. Any construction that belongs to the same form class as at least one of its immediate
constituents is described as endocentric.
3. Endocentric constructions fall into two types: subordinating and coordinating.
Unit 3
1. The phrase-structure of rules for the simple sentence is:
a. S NP + VP
b. VP Verb + NP
c. NP Det. + N
d. Verb Aux. + V
e. Det. the, a
f. N man, ball
g. Aux. will, can
h. V hit, see
Unit 4
1. The base of the phrase-structure syntactical system consists of two parts: a set of category
rules and a lexicon.
Unit 5
1. The difference between morphology and syntax is simply a difference between two of
these five levels: morpheme, word, phrase, clause and sentence; which is in fact no
Sciences
greater than the difference than the difference between the phrase level and the clause
level.
2. Four strata have been recognized for English, and it is probable that all languages may
have at least these four: the sememic, the lexemic, the morphemic, and the phonemic
strata. The sememic
Unit 6
1. The Linguistic Circle of Prague derived its inspiration from the work of Vilem Mathesius,
Nikolay Trubetskoy, Roman Jakobson and other scholars based in Prague in the decade
preceding World War II.
Unit 7
1. The transformation rules are sets of rules which will change or move constituents in the
structures derive from the phrase structure rules.
Unit 8
1. The main modifiers of a NP are: the determiners, the attributive adjectives, the adjectival
phrases, the participial phrases, the prepositional phrases, the noun adjuncts, the relative
clauses, the infinitival clauses and other clauses serving as complements to the noun.
Unit 9
1. The verb phrase corresponds to the predicate of traditional grammar.
Unit 10
1. Adjectives and adjective phrases function in two basic ways in clauses, either
attributively or predicatively. When they are attributive, they appear inside a noun phrase
and modify that noun phrase, and when they are predicative, they appear outside of the
noun phrase that they modify and typically follow a linking verb (copula).
Unit 11
Sciences
1. Adverbs perform the grammatical function of adjective phrase modifier within adjective
phrases.
Bibliography:
1. Fries, Charles, Structure of English, an Introduction to the Construction of

the English Sentences, Harcourt Brace, New York, 2000 (first edition
1952).
2. Chomsky, Noam, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge, 1965.
Sciences
3. Chomsky, Noam, Syntactic Structures, Oxford University Press, Oxford,

1985, (first edition 1957).
4. Huddleston, Rodney, Introduction to English Transformational Syntax,

Longman, London, 1976.
5. McCawley, James, Syntactic Phenomena of English, University of

Chicago, Chicago, 1998.
6. Jespersen, Otto, Analytic Syntax, Copenhagen, Levin and Munksgaard,

2001 (first edition 1937).
7. Baker, Carl Lee, English Syntax, Cambridge University Press, MIT Press,
Cambridge, second edition 1995.
Online Resources:
1. www.ust.edu/open/library/other/26/20/English%20/Grammar
%20/University%20Course.pdf
2. www.britannica.com/EBechecked/topic/228762/generative-
grammar
Sciences

Syntax 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Syntax 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LEC: English Syntax of the Phrase Structure 2014

The Syntax of the Phrase Structure

Second Year of Study

The Formal Theory of Language . 5

The Generative Transformational Grammar 9

Chomskys Generative Transformational Grammar 14

The Hierarchy of Grammatical Levels .25

Phrase Structure Grammar .. 29

Surface Structure and Deep Structure . 33

Noun Phrase ... 36

Verb Phrase ... 43

Answer Key ... 61

The Formal Theory of Language

Parsing is the process of recognizing an utterance (a string in natural languages) by breaking it

. The language of the grammar is then the infinite

set , where is repeated

The Syntax of Grammars

A finite set of terminal symbols that are disjoint from N.

A finite set P of production rules, each rule of the form.

A distinguished symbol is the start symbol.

A grammar is formally defined: . Such a formal grammar is often called a phrase

The Semantics of Grammars

The operation of a grammar can be defined in terms of relations on strings:

Given the grammar, , the binary relation (pronounced as "G derives in

one step") on strings in is defined by:

the start symbol ; that is, a sentential form is a member of .A

1. When was first proposed the generative transformational grammar?

2. Who proposed the generative transformational grammar?

The Generative Transformational Grammar

Bloomfields Theory of Syntax

2. Transformational grammar was initiated by Harris Z. in the course of work on what he

5. Bloomfield defined form classes, rather imprecisely, in terms of some common

6. By the constituent structure of a phrase or sentence is meant the hierarchical organization

1. What is a syntactical construction according to Bloomfield?

2. What is an endocentric construction?

3. State the two types of endocentric constructions.

Chomskys Transformational Generative Grammar

7. Aux. will, can

iii. NP + Verb + NP by rule 2

iv. Det. + N + Verb + NP by rule 3

v. Det. + N + Verb + Det. + N by rule 3

vi. Det. + N + Aux. + V + Det. + N by rule 4

vii. The + N + Aux. + V + Det. + N by rule 5

viii. The + N + Aux. + V + the + N by rule 5

ix. The + man + Aux. + V + the + N by rule 6

x. The + man + Aux. + V + the + ball by rule 6

xi. The + man + will + V + the + ball by rule 7

xii. The + man + will + hit + the + ball by rule 8

One of the principal characteristics of a transformational rule is its transformation of an

It is important to note that, unlike Harriss theory, Chomskys system of transformational

3. A phrase-structure grammar is one that consists entirely of phrase-structure rules,

4. A transformational grammar (as formalized by Chomsky) includes the phrase-structure

1. Give the phrase-structure of rules for a simple sentence.

5. The grammar (grammar is now to be understood as covering semantics and phonology,

The Hierarchy of Grammatical Levels

The Grammatical Levels

1. Which is the difference between morphology and syntax?

2. How many strata are in the English language?

Phrase Structure Grammar

The Prague School

The Combination of Structuralism and Functionalism

Chomskys Transformational Theory

4. In Chomskys later theories, deep structure ceased to be the locus of semantic

1. Who are the main representatives of the Prague School?