Transformational model of sentence analysis. Types of transformation.
Different sentence types are structurally and semantically related. So the syntactic structure of a given sentence may be described by making these relations explicit. Sentences, in which all constituents are obligatory, are called basic structures (= elementary sentences = kernel sentences). Linguists single out from 2 to 7 kernel sentences: 1) NV 2) NVN 3) NVPrepN 4) N is N 5) N is A 6) N is Adv. 7) N is PrepN. The structure of all other sentences is a result of certain transformations of kernel structures. This analysis, showing derivational relations of sentences, is called transformational (N.Chomsky). TM is based on IC-model and it goes further showing semantic and syntactic relations of different sentence types. TM describes paradigmatic relations of basic and derived structures, or the relations of syntactic derivation. Kernel sentences, which serve as the base for deriving other structures, are called deep (= underlying structures), opposed to surface structures of derived sentence types (= transforms). So both the deep and the surface structure belong to the syntactic level of analysis.
Transformations may be subdivided into intramodel = single-base (changing the kernel structure) and two-base (combining 2 structures).
1) modifying the kernel structure: She is working hard. → She is not working hard
2) changing the kernel structure: (2) She is working hard. → Her working hard. → Her hard work.
Some basic types of intramodel transformations:
1) substitution, deletion: Have you seen him? → Seen him?;
2) permutation or movement: He is here. → Is he here?;
3) nominalization: He arrived → His arrival;
4) two-base transformations:
- embedding: know that he has come,
- word-sharing: saw him cross the street.
TM shows that sentences with different surface structures paraphrase, because they are derived from the same deep structure: He arrived → his arrival → for him to arrive → his arriving.
TM shows that some sentences are ambiguous, because they derive from distinct deep structures: Flying planes can be dangerous. → 1. Planes are dangerous. 2. Flying is dangerous. So TM is an effective method of deciding grammatical ambiguity.
A grammar which operates using TM is a transformational grammar (TG). In TG the IC-analysis is supplemented with rules for transforming one sentence into another. TG became an extremely influental type of generative grammatical theory, also called generative grammar.
25. Semantic structure of the sentence (Ch. Fillmore).
Generative semantics. Case Grammar.
In Case Grammar deep (underlying) structure is semantic and surface structure is syntactic. Deep structure has 2 main constituents:
1) modality (features of mood, tense, aspect, negation, relating to the sentence as a whole);
2) proposition (a tenseless set of relationships): S → M + Pr.
The proposition is constituted by the semantic predicate (the central element) and some nominal elements, called arguments or participants: P → V + N1 + N2 + N3 The proposition is a reflection of situations and events of the outside world. The semantic predicate determines the number of arguments, or opens up places for arguments. Accordingly we may distinguish
- one-place predicates (She sang),
- two-place predicates (She broke the dish) and so on.
Arguments are in different semantic relations to the predicate. These relations are called semantic roles or deep cases (P+V+C1+C2+C3 ...). The choice of semantic roles depends on the nature of the predicate.
W.Chafe divides predicates into
2) non-states (events):
1. The wood is dry. - state
2. She sang. (What did she do?) - action
3. The wood dried. (What happened?) - process.
Semantic roles (deep cases) are judgements about the events.
The most general roles are agent (doer of the action) and patient (affected by the action or state). Actions are accompanied by agents and states. Processes - by patients. Predicates, denoting both actions and processes - by agents and patients: She broke the dish.
The original set of deep cases includes 6 cases (by Ch.Fillmore): agentive, objective, beneficiary, instrument, locative, factitive. E.g.: 1. He dug the ground. (Objective). 2. He dug a hole. (Factitive). Sentences (1) and (2) have the same surface structure, but different deep structure.
On the other hand different syntactic structures may refer to the same deep structure: