Generative grammar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| It has been suggested that generative linguistics be merged into this article or section. (Discuss) |
In theoretical linguistics, generative grammar refers to a proof-theoretic framework for the study of syntax partially inspired by formal grammar theory and popularized by Noam Chomsky, and more specifically to particular instantiations of this general framework, that is, grammatical frameworks adopting as a core assumption that the domain of a grammatical theory is to predict the precise set of sentences which would be considered "grammatical" in a given natural language while simultaneously predicting any other sentence's grammatical failings (and as such are able to "generate" the languages's grammar).
Generative grammar is thus characterized by a notion of grammaticality as a discrete (yes-or-no) parameter that can be established algorithmically. This contrasts with approaches of stochastic grammar which consider grammaticality as a probabilistic variable.
Its emphasis on computability and its historical conflation with the "nativist" postulate of an "innate" Universal grammar further contrasts with functional and behaviourist theories.
Contents |
[edit] Frameworks
Any such framework of generative grammar is realized as a set of rules or principles that recursively "specify" or "generate" the well-formed expressions of a natural language. This encompasses a large set of different approaches to grammar. The term generative grammar has been associated with at least the following schools of linguistics:
- Transformational grammar (TG)
- Standard Theory (ST)
- Extended Standard Theory (EST)
- Revised Extended Standard Theory (REST)
- Principles and Parameters Theory (P&P)
- Relational Grammar (RG)
- Lexical-functional Grammar (LFG)
- Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar (GPSG)
- Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG)
[edit] Succession of TG "Standards"
[edit] Standard Theory (1965)
The so-called Standard Theory corresponds to the generative model as laid out in Chomsky's Aspects (1965). Core aspects are the distinction of competence vs. performance, distinction of Deep Structure vs. Surface Structure
[edit] Extended Standard Theory (1965-1973)
The so-called Extended Standard Theory was formulated in the late 1960s to early 1970s. Features are:
- syntactic constraints
- generalized phrase structures (X-bar theory)
[edit] Revised Extended Standard Theory (1973-1980)
The so-called Revised Extended Standard Theory was formulated between 1973 and 1980. It contains
- restrictions upon X-bar theory (Jackendoff (1977)).
- assumption of the COMP position.
- Move α
[edit] Government and Binding (1981-1986)
Chomsky's Lectures on Government and Binding (1981) and Barriers (1986).
[edit] Minimalist Program (1995-2005)
[edit] Context-free grammars
Generative grammars can be described and compared with the aid of the Chomsky hierarchy proposed by Noam Chomsky in the 1950s. This sets out a series of types of formal grammars with increasing expressive power. Among the simplest types are the regular grammars (type 3); Chomsky claims that regular grammars are not adequate as models for human language, because all human languages allow the embedding of strings within strings in an hierarchical way.
At a higher level of complexity are the context-free grammars (type 2). The derivation of a sentence by a context-free grammar can be depicted as a derivation tree. Linguists working in generative grammar often view such derivation trees as a primary object of study. According to this view, a sentence is not merely a string of words, but rather a tree with subordinate and superordinate branches connected at nodes.
Essentially, the tree model works something like this example, in which S is a sentence, D is a determiner, N a noun, V a verb, NP a noun phrase and VP a verb phrase:
Image:Basic english syntax tree.png
The resulting sentence could be The dog ate the bone. Such a tree diagram is also called a phrase marker. They can be represented more conveniently in text form, (though the result is less easy to read); in this format the above sentence would be rendered as: [S [NP [D The ] [N dog ] ] [VP [V ate ] [NP [D the ] [N bone ] ] ] ]
However, Chomsky at some point argued that phrase structure grammars are also inadequate for describing natural languages. To address this, Chomsky formulated the more complex system of transformational grammar.
[edit] Grammaticality judgements
When generative grammar was first proposed, it was widely hailed as a way of formalizing the implicit set of rules a person "knows" when they know their native language and produce grammatical utterances in it (grammaticality intuitions). However Chomsky has repeatedly rejected that interpretation; according to him, the grammar of a language is a statement of what it is that a person has to know in order to recognise an utterance as grammatical, but not a hypothesis about the processes involved in either understanding or producing language.
In any case the reality is that most native speakers would reject many sentences produced even by a phrase structure grammar. For example, although very deep embeddings are allowed by the grammar, sentences with deep embeddings are not accepted by listeners, and the limit of acceptability is an empirical matter that varies between individuals, not something that can be easily captured in a formal grammar. Consequently, the influence of generative grammar in empirical psycholinguistics has declined considerably.
[edit] In music
Generative grammar has been used in music theory and analysis such as by Fred Lerdahl and in Schenkerian analysis. See: Chord progression#Rewrite rules.
[edit] References
- Hurford, J. (1990) Nativist and functional explanations in language acquisition. In I. M. Roca (ed.), Logical Issues in Language Acquisition, 85-136. Foris, Dordrecht.
[edit] See also
| Automata theory: formal languages and formal grammars | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Chomsky hierarchy | Grammars | Languages | Minimal automaton |
| Type-0 | Unrestricted | Recursively enumerable | Turing machine |
| n/a | (no common name) | Recursive | Decider |
| Type-1 | Context-sensitive | Context-sensitive | Linear-bounded |
| n/a | Indexed | Indexed | Nested stack |
| n/a | Tree-adjoining | Mildly context-sensitive | Embedded pushdown |
| Type-2 | Context-free | Context-free | Nondeterministic pushdown |
| n/a | Deterministic context-free | Deterministic context-free | Deterministic pushdown |
| Type-3 | Regular | Regular | Finite |
| Each category of languages or grammars is a proper subset of the category directly above it. | |||
de:Generative Grammatik es:Gramática generativa fr:Grammaire générative et transformationnelle ko:생성문법 it:Grammatica generativa ja:生成文法 nl:Generatieve taalkunde pl:Gramatyka generatywna pt:Gramática gerativa cs:Generativní gramatika sv:Generativ grammatik
