¡Descarga Chomsky's Cognitive Grammar: Universal Principles & Language Acquisition y más Apuntes en PDF de Morfología y Sintaxis solo en Docsity!
PART B: SYNTAX
Unit 6. An Introduction to Syntax
I. What is Universal Grammar?
Noam Chomsky‟s approach to grammar is essentially cognitive , because it studies grammar as it is stored in the speaker‟s mind. This relates to Chomsky‟s distinction between competence and performance , which can be defined as follows: Competence is the native speaker‟s tacit knowledge of his or her language. Performance is what people actually say or understand by what someone else says on a given occasion (thus, subject to errors and slips of the tongue). The grammatical competence of a native speaker is defined by Chomsky as the speaker‟s I-language (which stands for internalised language ). An I-language is an instantiation of the more general idea of Universal Grammar , which generalises from the grammars of particular I-languages to the grammar of all possible natural I-languages. Chomsky‟s conception of the Universal Grammar includes the following components:
Lexicon semantic representation Syntactic structure Syntax phonetic form representation
From 1995 onwards, Chomsky advocates for the simplicity of syntactic analyses and the reduction of the theoretical apparatus required. This is the so-called Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory , which is the basis for Minimalist Syntax.
II. The Language Faculty
One of the key elements in a cognitive approach to grammar is learnability , i.e. explaining how language is acquired. It is widely accepted that, around the age of eighteenth months, children start a rapid and uniform expansion of their linguistic ability. They do so in spite of: Their general intelligence , even at pathological levels. Degenerate data (false starts, disconnected phrases). No formal instruction This leads Chomsky to suggest that all children possess an innate Language Faculty (or Language Acquisition Program). When the Language Acquisition Program activates, it progresses rapidly in spite of insufficient/degenerate data.
Experience Language Grammar of L Faculty of L
This language acquisition device is only operational in the first few years of a person‟s life, before his/her puberty. This is the so-called critical period for the acquisition of syntax and phonology.
III. Principles, Parameters and Universal Grammar
An interesting question concerns the precise nature of the human language faculty. Work dating back to the 1980s suggests that it consists of a series of principles and parameters. Principles are those aspects of grammar shared by all natural languages , that is to say, those aspects which are common to any language in the world. An example of a principle operating in all languages is the so-called Locality Principle , which states that all grammatical operations are local.
Speaker A: He had said someone would do something Speaker B: He had said who would do what? Speaker B: Who had he said would do what? Speaker B: Who would he had said do what? Speaker B: What had he said who would do?
This locality principle operates, not just for movement, but also for agreement and case assignment. Parameters are those aspects that vary from language to language. Thus, learning the grammar of a language equals correctly setting the parameters for that language. In generative grammar, parameters have to be understood as on/off mechanisms: learners just have to choose whether a given parameter is active or inactive in a given language. This greatly simplifies language learning. Some examples of parameters would include: Null subject parameter: „On‟ for Spanish ( Habla inglés, Come muy deprisa ), „Off‟ for English ( *Speaks English, *Eats very fast ), e.g. Spanish a null-subject language, whereas English is a non-null subject language. Wh-parameter: It determines whether wh- expressions can move (e.g. English „On‟) or whether these remain in situ (e.g. Chinese, „Off‟):
(a) What do you think he will say? (b) Ni xiangxin ta hui shuo shenme You think he will say what? Head parameter: The heads of phrases normally precede their complements in languages like English ( head-first languages) or follow their complements in languages like Korean ( head-last languages).
(a) Close the door (b) Muneul dadara English Korean: Door close
Beware of the fact that, under this approach, the traditional distinction between the definite and the indefinite article does not apply: the is a determiner; a is a quantifier. Determiners and quantifiers are syntactically different from adjectives because:
Adjectives can be stacked , whereas quantifiers and determiners cannot: tall dark handsome strangers vs. *all both twins. Determiners and quantifiers always precede adjectives : the same old excuses vs. * same the old excuses. Determiners and quantifiers are obligatory before singular count nouns, as opposed to adjectives: A chair, the chair vs. *chair, *comfortable chair. Determiners and quantifiers are restricted to modifying nouns which have specific number properties : Can you pass me a chair? vs. * Can you pass me a chairs?; He doesn’t have much furniture vs. *He doesn’t have much chairs. Typical adjectives, on the other hand, can occur before any type of noun: A nice chair, nice chairs, nice furniture. Determiners and quantifiers are functional categories (i.e. they lack „lexical substance‟), whereas adjectives are lexical/substantive categories:
(a) A thoughtful friend / cat? / fish?? / pan! (b) A/another/every/the/this friend / cat / fish / pan
Some linguists argue that quantifiers are just a sub-category of determiners and assume that the/this/that are definite determiners and a/some/many are indefinite determiners. However, the fact that we can combine them in sentences like All the people concerned were there suggests that we should distinguish between determiners (D) and quantifiers (Q).
VII. Pronouns
Traditionally defined as denoting a class of words which are said to „stand in place of‟ a noun. However, there are different types of pronouns: N-pronouns , or pronominal nouns, behave like a regular count noun, but takes its descriptive content from its antecedent:
John has a red car and him has a blue one I’ll take the green apples if you haven’t got any red ones
Q-pronouns , or pronominal quantifiers, which are the pronominal version of quantifiers when these are not followed by a noun. Under this theoretical framework, question words are also Q-pronouns.
All are welcome Many died in the accident Each was envious of the other What have you been doing? Which do you choose?
D-pronouns, or pronominal determiners, which are the pronominal version of determiners when these are not followed by a noun:
I prefer this I haven’t read that Have you already paid for those?
Traditional grammar referred to personal pronouns , which encode the grammatical property „person‟, e.g. first person pronouns ( I/me/my/we/us/our ); second person pronouns ( you/your ); third person pronouns ( he/him/his/she/her/it its/they/them/their ). Personal pronouns still possess some case forms:
John snores / He snores (nominative) Find John! Find him! (accusative) Look at John’s trousers! / Look at his trousers (genitive)
Most linguists assume that personal pronouns are a subtype of D-pronouns. Evidence in favour of this assumption comes from the following examples:
We republicans don’t trust you democrats
This analysis, however, also poses some problems:
Third person pronouns cannot occur pre-nominally: *They boys. D-pronouns can be premodified by the quantifier all , e.g. all these girls, all those boys. However, you cannot say *all they are tired.
For the sake of simplicity, we shall keep the label „pronoun‟, PRN, for all pronouns, regardless of whether they are N-pronouns, Q-pronouns or D- pronouns.
VIII. Auxiliaries
As opposed to main verbs, auxiliaries ( i) only allow a verb expression as their complement; (ii) mark grammatical features associated with the following verb, such as tense, aspect, voice or mood.
He is going / He has gone (progressive/perfect aspect) These were bought yesterday (passive voice) They don’t go / They didn’t go (present/past tense) They may come / They can go (mood)
Other peculiarities of auxiliaries include the following:
They can undergo inversion without the need of „DO‟ support:
You can speak English Can you speak English?
Auxiliaries can be negated by a following NOT, again without „DO‟ support:
I don’t really want to go to the dentist, but I know I should I know I should go to the dentist, but I just don’t want to
Back in 1981, Chomsky suggested labelling both infinitival to and finite auxiliaries as INFL (inflection) , reduced to just „I‟ in subsequent work. However, since the mid 1990s, there is a trend to refer to infinitival to and finite auxiliaries as T (tense). Inflected auxiliaries would be examples of finite tense and to would be an instance of non-finite tense:
We believe the president [ may (^) T ] have been lying (finite tense) We believe the president [ to (^) T ] have been lying (non-finite tense)
Tense information in non-finite forms derives from the context:
We believe the president to have been lying (present) Americans believed Nixon to have been lying in 1974 (past)
X. Complementisers
Complementisers ( C) roughly correspond to what traditional syntax labelled as “subordinating conjunctions”. These are words which introduce complement clauses such as the following:
I think [ that C you may be right ] I doubt [ if C you can help me ] I’m anxious [ for C you to receive the best treatment possible ]
Complementisers provide us with three main types of important information:
They indicate the presence of an embedded clause , acting as a complement of the preceding word. They determine the finiteness or non-finiteness of the following verb, e.g. that/if are finite complementisers, whereas for is a non-finite complementiser.
I think [ that you are right ] I think [ that you to be right ] I doubt [ if you will help me ] I doubt [ if you to help me ] [ For you should receive …] [ For you to receive… ]
Complementisers mark the force of the clause they introduce: interrogative in the case of if , declarative (=statement) in the case of that , irrealis (=hypothetical, future) in the cause of for.
There are significant differences between for as a preposition and for as a complementiser. Some of these are summarised below:
The preposition has lexical meaning. Consequently, it can be preceded by straight/right ; this is not possible with the complementiser which only has functional meaning:
He headed straight/right for the pub It’s vital straight/right for you to be there
Complementiser for can be the initial element of a subject clause; the preposition cannot occupy this position:
For him to resign would cause chaos For him would cause chaos
Complementiser for can be followed by an infinitive; prepositions are always followed by an – ing form.
It wouldn’t be a good idea for you to be there (complementiser) He was severely punished for being there (preposition)
The preposition for can be placed before a wh- word or at the end of the sentence; the same is not true of complementisers
I will vote for Senator Obama in the primaries For which senator will you vote for in the primaries? They were anxious for Senator Obama to win For which senator were they anxious to win?
Complementiser for can be replaced by other complementisers (such as that ). The same is not true of the preposition for.
Is it really necessary for him to be here? Is it really necessary that he should be here? We are heading for a general strike We are heading that there will be a general strike
The complementiser that and the determiner that also differ in a variety of aspects.
Phonologically, the complementiser is pronounced // and the determiner, //. In its use as a determiner, that can be replaced by another determiner:
Nobody knows about that/the/this incident I’m sure that it’s true BUT this it’s true / the it’s true
The determiner that can be used pronominally; this is impossible with the complementiser.
Nobody can blame you for that I’m sure that
The third type of complementiser, if , differs from wh- words in a variety of ways. This is why it cannot be considered as an interrogative adverb.
