TRANSFORMATIONAL &

GENERATIVE
GRAMMAR (TGG),
Licence 2 & FIP 2.
Dr ATCHE Djedou, F. H-B University, 2019-20
GENERAL OBJECTIVE:
Learners will know
the Basics
of Transformational
& Generative
Grammar
(Generativism)
 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES:

Learners should be able to

account for the following:
1- Syntactic Theory;
2- Standard Theory;
3- The Kernel Sentence;
4- Generative & Transformational
Features;
5- The Notion of Grammaticality
6- Universal Grammar
 SOME REFERENCES
 Chomsky, N. (1957) Syntactic Structures). Mouton
 Chomsky, N.(1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT
Press.
 Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. MIT Press.
 Radford, A. Transformational Grammar: A First Course.
Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. 1988.
 Lyons, J.(1977) Chomsky. Fontana. Collins. Glasgow
 Huddleston, R. ( 1976) An Introduction to English
Transformational Syntax. Longman.
 Jackendoff, R.S. (1972) Semantic Interpretation in
Generative Grammar. MIT Press. Cambridge.
 Nicolas RUWET. (1967) Introduction à la Grammaire
Générative, Paris, Plon.
 Waria Omar Amin. (2012). ‘Models of Generative Grammar’
Iraqi Academic Scientific Journal.
 INTRODUCTION (1)
 In 1957 Noam CHOMSKY, an American
Linguist, published Syntactic Structures, a
statement of the principles of
Transformational & Generative
Grammar.
 This grammar has had a profound effect on
the study of all languages, including English.
 It was a reaction against structuralism and
the first model to acknowledge formally the
significance of Deep Structure.
 INTRODUCTION (2)
 Transformational Grammar strongly criticized
Structural Linguistics on the ground that this
theory was describing language as a final
product.
 According to the advocators of
Transformational and Generative Grammar
(TGG), a sound linguistic theory should try and
explain how sentences are produced.
 For them, a sound theory should describe the
linguistic operations involved in the
production of sentences.
 TGG then claims to be a grammar of production.
 INTRODUCTION (3)
The objective is to create an explicit model of
what an ideal speaker of the language
intuitively knows.
 The model must assign a structure, therefore,
to all the sentences of the language concerned
and only to these sentences.
 From its initial version in the mid-1950s up
today, TGG has gone through several
reformulations;
 Noam Chomsky was always prepared to revisit
his theory of the speaker’s Competence each
time his detractors would raise new syntactic
difficulties;
 INTRODUCTION (4)
 However, whatever the modifications
reinserted, from the first Formulation (F1)
to the subsequent versions with the
Universal Grammar Hypothesis via the
Parameter Hypothesis up to the
Minimalist Program, some cardinal
concepts have remained;
 Such is the case of the notions of
Transformation Rules, Competence and
Performance, Cognitive Dimension of the
human language, etc.
 I- BASIC ASSUMPTIONS
All Chomsky’s theory (TGG) evolves around
4 basic questions:
1- What is language?
2- What do we know when we say that we know a
language?
3- What are the defining characteristics between natural
languages and other systems of communication?
4- Are languages really different? And to what extent do
they differ? And if they are different, do they differ in an
unpredictable way?
 In answering these questions, two main
concepts stand out: the Innateness of
Language, and Competence &
Performance.
1.1- The Innateness of Language (1)
 It is the assumption that our mother tongue
does not come from the outside world, but
it is originated from inside the individual.

 Admitting that language is innate is also

admitting that a native language cannot
be acquired through imitation.

 Native languages are not learned, they

simply develop all along the cognitive
development.
1.1- The Innateness of Language (2)
 When we consider the complexity of
human languages and the way they are
easily acquired by young children, we
are compelled to admit that not all the rules
they use to speak the language come from
the outside.
 Chomsky finds two types of evidence to
show Language Innateness:
 The positive Evidence &
 The Negative Evidence
 1.1.1- The Positive Evidence (1)

 It is the existence of concrete facts indicating

that young children rely on a built-in
system to progressively master their native
language.
 From exposure to a certain linguistic input,
children will learn very limited number of
structures, and from these, they are able to
make their own verbal production.
 By approximation, they manage to develop a
relatively correct grammar over time;
1.1.1- The Positive Evidence (2)
 The fact that they produce correct sentences
they have never heard before is an evidence
that the principles of such structures pre-
existed to the incoming linguistic input.
 In other words, since they know the
sentence structure, they can produce
some new sentences just by following the
rules!
 And this capacity of creating novel structures
is possible because of the Language
Acquisition Device (LAD).
 1.1.2- Negative Evidence
(La Preuve de l’Absurde) (1)
 In their linguistic exposure, children are
exposed to a Limited Input, and sometimes
to a distorted input.
 This mean that around them, adults and
parents sometimes will speak with mistakes.
 But children do not appear to reproduce the
same mistakes though they are not
necessarily taught device in their mind that
does not make home for any kinds of wrong
combinations.
 1.1.2- Negative Evidence
(La Preuve de l’Absurde) (2)
 So, it is as if the psychological apparatus were
refuting the combinations that do not fit in our
mind.
 Young children or learners of a second language
do not make any kind of mistake.

 We can predict some mistakes learners

will never make.
E.g. “Le table” or “le table est petite”, or “la femme
a donne trois cahiers” are possible mistakes.
 But mistakes such as “cahiers a femme trois la
donne” are not possible.
 1.1.2- Negative Evidence
(La Preuve de l’Absurde) (3)
 The last sentence is very unlikely in the
mistake repertoire of the French language
because it does not comply with the internal
logic of sentence structure whereby we divide
sentences into two immediate constituents.
 The fact that some mistakes are almost
impossible is the evidence that long before
acquiring their linguistic experience from
adults, the logical system of children rejects
some combinations as impossible, because
they do not fit in the cognitive system of
learners.
 1.1.2- Negative Evidence
(La Preuve de l’Absurde) (4)
The logical organization of the sentence is
anterior to the linguistic experience of
learners.
 No language is easier or more difficult
than other languages.
 The difficulty to learn a language comes
from reasons, which are not linguistic
factors but from social and
psychological factors.
 1.1.2- Negative Evidence
(La Preuve de l’Absurde) (5)
 The complexity of languages is just
apparent.
 It is a mere surface perception.
 All languages function according to the
same universal principles.
 So, we can oppose the surface level’s
apparent complexity to an underlying
organization, and this is reflected in the
opposition of Competence and Performance.
1.2- Competence & Performance
1.2.1- Competence
 Competence is the tacit knowledge of
language rules that the speaker uses to
produce correct sentences in his language.

 So, Chomsky defines it as ‘the ideal speaker-

hearer’s knowledge of his language’.
 The person who has acquired knowledge of a
language has internalized a system of rules that
relate sound and meaning in a particular way.
 1.2.1- Competence
 The linguist constructing a grammar of a
language is in effect proposing a hypothesis
concerning the internalized system.

 In other words, competence is the perfect

storehouse of linguistic knowledge.
 It is therefore a very powerful skill.

 Using his/her competence, the ideal native

speaker can produce and understand all
possible sentences all his/her language.
 1.2.1- Competence
 He/she can even decipher those he has never
heard before, that is, novel sentences.

 The speaker also uses his competence to

make correct judgement on sentences.
 Competence is not only at the level of syntax,
it manifests itself at any level of language
practice.
 In practice, competence is something complex
and nowadays people distinguish several types
of competence.
  Grammatical Competence
 It refers to the assimilation of grammar rules.
 E.g. 1- I thought Mary was sick, but it turned out
that she wasn’t.
 E.g. 2- He thinks that John is wrong.

 It is simply our knowledge or our experience

of English that shows that “she” refers to
“Mary”, whereas “he” cannot be interpreted
as “John” in the second sentence.
 Grammatical competence then belongs to
language structure: it is the intuitive
knowledge of the language.
  Pragmatic Competence
 This type of competence belongs to
language use.
 E.g. Today was a disaster! (says a politician)

 This sentence is difficult to interpret, unless

we knew that the politician gave a speech
that completely went down.

 Pragmatic Competence calls for non-

linguistic information for the production
and interpretation of the sentences.
 NOTA BENE:
 So, since its advent in the 1950s, TGG
has been constantly and dynamically
developing;
 Chomsky and many linguists
throughout the world have contributed
to the different developments.
 So, TGG has undergone numerous and
various Models & Reformulations.
Transformational & Generative Grammar

Syntactic Theory
Formulation 1 (1957)
 FORMULATION 1 (1)

 As early as the first Formulation (F1),

Chomsky described the Ideal Native
Competence as relying on basic modules as
this speaker produces a sentence.
 The generation or the sentence production
process goes through 3 modules.
 And the final sentence we hear from a
speaker is the result of this long-standing
mental process.
 2- The Three Components
 Thus, the native speaker operates along
three modules named “components” through
which the sentence production process unfolds :
a. The Base Component;
b. The Transformational Component
c. The Morpho-Phonological Component.

 The speakers performs the required and

specific linguistic operations in each
component until the surface level;
 In short, the sentence we hear is the result of
the execution of diverse sorts of rules inside
the components aforementioned.
 2.1- The Base Component
 The base component sub-divides into two
sub-components that are the Category
(categorial) Component and the Lexical
Component.

2.1.1- The Category Component (1)

 This component contains category rewrite
rules and the sentence project appears in the form
of grammatical categories only.
2.1.1- The Category Component (2)
 To produce a sentence like :
The boy eats those mangoes

 The speaker performs the category rewrite rules

as follows:
1. S  NP1 + VP
2. NP  Nber + MN
3. MN  Det + N1
4. VP  Aux + MV
5. Aux  T
6. MV  V + NP.
7. NP2  (go to rule 2)
NB: Conventionally, the horizontal arrow () reads “rewrites”
2.1.1- The Category Component (3)

 Surely this is not what we hear when some

one speaks and this means that the
construction of the sentence is not over;
 The speaker then moves to another type of
rewrite rules, the Lexical Rewrite Rules.
 For the sentence above, the lexical rewrite
rules are as follows and these are the Lexical
Insertion Rules
2.1.1- The Category Component (4)
 Nbr  Sing
 Det  The
 N1 boy
 Aux  Pres
 Verb  eat
 Nbr  Plur
 Det that
 N2  mango
Once the Lexical Rewrite Rules are executed, the
speaker get the Deep Structure (DS) of the sentence
also named the abstract structure:
DS : [sing. + the + boy + Pres + eat + plur. + that
+ mango]
2.1.1- The Category Component (5)
Once again, the Deep Structure is not what
we use to speak to people, the construction of the
sentence is still yet to be completed;
 Note: when you talk to someone you don’t tell
him!!! “my sentence will be in the present
tense, that the subject will be singular and the
object plural”
 At that level, the rules to apply in the Base
Component are over and the speaker moves to
the following module, the Transformational
Component.
2.2- The Transformational Component (1)

This Component also contains rules, but rules of

transformations (or Transformational Rules);
The utility and role of the transformational rules
is to convert the unfinished forms of the deep
structure into elements as they are in the English
language.
And depending on the speaking objectives, the
speaker will resort to several transformational
rules some of which might involve substitution
(commutation), displacement, …;
Transformational rules are applied on the
elements contained in the Deep Structure.
2.2- The Transformational Component (2)
 For the Deep structure built to have our
sentence “The boy eats these mangoes” we
will have number of rules being applied,
namely the Agreement Transformations:

DS : [sing. + the + boy + Pres + eat + plur. +

that + mango]

 T Agr (DS)
=> sing+the + sing.+boy + 3rd Pers Sing+eat +
plu+that + plu+mango
2.2- The Transformational Component (3)
The Agreement transformation indicates the
specificity of the English language in that there
are syntactic agreements between the
Determiner and the Number category and this
agreement is also carried over onto the Noun.
 Similarly there are syntactic agreements
between the NP subject and the verb ,etc.
 Syntactic agreements and the way they are
arranged constitute a Parameter of English
language, a feature ascribed in the Universal
Grammar that this language exploits while most
African languages do not set this Parameter.
2.2- The Transformational Component (4)
Once again, the structure obtained as a result
of the application of Transformational rules
do not bring about an ordinary structure for
use by speakers, though it is what is supposed
to take place in human’s mental process.
 The speakers now moves on to the
Morphological Module and applies the required
transformations (Affix Transformation,
Morphological Transformations).
2.2- The Transformational Component (5)
 For the sentence used as an illustration, let us
recall that as a result of applying the
transformational rules, the incomplete structure
obtained is the following:

[sing+the + sing.+boy + 3rd Pers Sing+eat +

plu+that + plu+mango]

 The application of the subsequent

transformations, namely the Morphological
transformation consists in affixing morphemes
at the position required by the English language;
2.2- The Transformational Component (6)
 The English language requires that all bound
morphemes be affixed by suffixation to lexical
bases (roots or radical) and not the other way
round (i.e. pre-fixation), as it might happen in
some languages;
Note that in some languages (Sandawi,
Tanzania) and presumably in Ki-Swahili, the
object pronoun can be suffixed to the verb, which
is a particular parameter of these languages…
The application of the affix transformation rules
gives the following string:
2.2- The Transformational Component (7)

T Aff (DS)
 [the+sing + boy+sing. + eat+3rdPers+Sing + plur+that
+ mango+plur]

 It is assumed in the first Formulation of

TGG, that the Affix transformation rules
are this way:
 sing.+the => the+sing.
 plur+that => that+plur
 eat+Pres 3rd Pers Sing => eat+3rd Pers Sing
2.2- The Transformational Component (8)
 But such a structure holds for languages that
are equipped with a writing system or when the
sentence is written on a paper or in a written
document;
 Therefore, in order to be heard by his co-
speaker, the speaker commit himself in the
latest transformation, the morphological
transformation by converting categorial
elements in actual morphological format onto
the last version of the deep structure.
2.2- The Transformational Component (9)
 The morphological transformation rules
gives the format that all native and non-
native speakers of English know and
recognize as a viable structure:
T Morpho (DS)
=> The boy eats those mangoes
 Then, the phonological transformation
gives the final format of the sentence and the
outcome is as follows:
T Phono (DS)
=> [ ð  b ɔ I i:ts ð  ʊ Z mæng  ʊ Z ]
2.2- The Transformational Component (10)
The transformational process from the raw deep
structure up to the surface structure is called the
derivation of the sentence and in pedagogical
practice, the derivation process of a sentence
unfolds this way:
i) The category rewrite rules
ii) The lexical insertion rules
iii) The tree diagram;
iv) The application of the diverse transformations:
 Agreement Transformation;
 Affix Transformation
 Morphological Transformation;
 Phonological Transformation.
2.2- The Transformational Component (11)
Very importantly, Chomsky claims that his
theory is robust enough to account for all
sentences but with a relatively reduced
rules, compared to Structural Linguistics.

Additionally he gave evidence that TGG

accounts for structurally ambiguous
sentence (not lexically ambiguous ones in the
First Formulation of TGG);
2.2- The Transformational Component (12)
The power of his theory, so he claims, is that sentences
recognized to be ambiguous will be derived from
different deep structures and from different tree
diagrams, since they have different meanings;

Consider the following sentence:

The policemen struck the gangster with the
hammer
How do you understand it?
Use the Structural Linguistics
formalization test to spell out the
ambiguity.
2.2- The Transformational Component (13)
You should have something like this :

(a) The policemen struck (the gangster with the hammer)

(b) It is (with the hammer) that the policemen struck the gangster

 In the last resort, it is the meaning of the

sentence (i.e. the speaker communication
intents) that commands having different
tree diagrams and different deep
structure, the DS which is the meanings
derived from the deep structure.
2.2- The Transformational Component (14)
 Case study with the sentence:
The policemen shoot the gangster
i) The rewrite rules:

 S  NP1 + VP
 NP  Nbr1 + MN1
 MN  Det1 + N1
 VP  Aux + MV
 MV  V + NP. 2
 NP2  Nbr2 + MN2
 MN2 Det2 + N2
2.2- The Transformational Component (15)

 Case study with the sentence:

The policemen shoot the gangster

ii. The Lexical Insertion Rules

 Nbr  plur
 Det  The
 N1 policeman
 Verb  shoot
 Nbr  Sing
 Det the
 N2  gangster
 The policemen shoot the gangster
iii) The Tree Diagram
S

NP
VP

Nbr
MN
Aux
MV

Det N V NP
T
Nbr MN

Det N

Plur the policeman Pres shoot Sing the gangster

2.2- The Transformational Component (15)
 Case study with the sentence:
The policemen shoot the gangster

iii. Transformations
T Aggr (DS)
=> [Plur+the + plur+policeman + Pres 3rd Person+
Plur+shoot+ sing+the + sing+gangster]

T Aff (DS)
=> [the+Plur + policeman+plur + shoot+Pres 3rd
Person Plur + the+sing + gangster+sing]
2.2- The Transformational Component (16)

 Case study with the sentence:

The policemen shoot the gangster

iii. Transformations

T Morpho(DS)
=> The policemen shoot the gangster

T Phono (DS)
=> [ ð  p ɔ ’ l I sm  n ∫u:t ð  ‘ gæŋst ]
Transformational & Generative Grammar

Standard Theory
Formulation 2 (1965)
 3.1- Basic Principles (1)

 In 1965 Chomsky published Aspects of the

Theory of Syntax in which he summarizes
the development of Transformational
Grammar Theory from its beginning to 1965.

 He also formalizes the version of the theory

which is generally referred to as The
Standard Theory.

 The most radical changes are:

 3.1- Basic Principles (2)
 1- The notion of Kernel is abandoned and
he identified the underlying constituents of
sentences as Deep Structure.
 2- Deep structures are generated by
Phrase-Structure Rules, and Surface
Structures are derived from deep structures
by a series of transformations.
 4- The recursive property of the grammar is
accounted for in the Phrase Structure Rules.
 3- Semantics is an integrated part of the
theory, leading to Generative Semantics.
 3.1- Basic Principles (3)
 Generative Semantics (GS) is an approach
within Generative Grammar that was initiated in
late 1960s, by John Ross, Paul Postal,
James McCawley and George Lakoff.
 GS proposes that the Deep Structure of a
sentence is the equivalent and sole input of
the semantic representation, from which the
Surface Structure can be derived.
 This is made possible by using only one set of
rules that relate underlying meaning and surface
form rather than separate sets of semantic
and syntactic rules.
 3.1- Basic Principles (4)
 This approach necessitated more complex
underlying structures than those proposed by
Chomsky, and more complex transformations
as a consequence.
 The approach was appealing in several
respects:
 1- It offered a clear insight for explaining synonymity.
 2- The theory had a pleasingly intuitive structure: the
form of a sentence was quite literally derived
from its meaning via transformations.
 Generative Semantics approach is
outlined in the following diagram
 3.1- Basic Principles (5)
 The main difference between Surface
Structure Model and Aspect Model is the
insertion of (semantic component) into
the theoretical framework of TG grammar.
 The core aspect of Standard Theory is the
distinction between two different levels of a
sentence, called Deep Structure and
Surface Structure.
 The two representations are linked to each
other by Transformational Grammar.
 3.1- Basic Principles (6)
 Deep structure is an abstract level of structural
organization in which all the elements
determining structural and semantic
interpretation are represented.
 Chomsky modifies his theory in such a way that
deep structures are generated in two stages:
 First a simple set of Phrase Structure Rules
generate Phrase Markers in which the terminal
positions are empty slots for the lexical items to
be inserted in the second stage. Such Phrase
Markers are referred to as pre -lexical structure.
 The following is an example for Phrase Markers:
3.1- Basic Principles (7)
 3.1- Basic Principles (8)
 In the second stage the empty places are
filled with complex symbols consisting of
morphemes plus their syntactic and semantic
features by the rules of lexical
transformations.
 The PS rules and lexical transformations
jointly constitute what is called the BASE
COMPONENT of the grammar.
 For example a deep structure for the
sentence (The girl bought the bird) will be:
 This Diagram shows how
Grammar is outlined in the
ASPECT Theory:
3.2-Replacing the VP: The Predicate
A refinement of the Verb Phrase (VP)
constituent was suggested in the subsequent
version of TGG, Formulation 2 (F2) on the
grounds that all VPs are not syntactically and
semantically identical.
 The VP constituent then changed to become a
dominant (governing) constituent of VP, the
Predicate
 In effect, in the sentences…
a) He goes to Bouaké
b) He works in Bouaké
3.2-Replacing the VP: The Predicate
 … Traditional grammar taught us that the two
Prepositional Phrases (PPs) are Complements of
location (in French Complément circonstatiel de
lieu), …
… while in actual facts the semantic content of
each verb (‘go’ and ‘work’) implies different
things;
‘GO’ implies a movement while ‘WORK’ bears
no movement underlying meaning;
These two different interpretation commends
that we discriminate them:
3.2-Replacing the VP: The Predicate
GO

WORK

 It automatically follows that EVEN though

constituents “TO Bouaké” and “IN Bouaké” are
all PPs, they do not ensure the same syntactic
function…
… and this because they do not have the same
semantic affiliation (dependence) with the two
verbs (go, work).
3.2-Replacing the VP: The Predicate

 While “GO” sort extends the

of
semantic effect of movement,
 “WORK” does not necessarily claims
an NP whether Object or Complement.
Therefore the Phrase-marker (i.e.
the Tree Diagram) needs to
discriminate this situation as follows:
 The Tree Diagram (= Phrase-Marker)
a) He works in Bouaké

S
NP
Pred

PP
VP

Prep NP
Aux MV

MN
V
T
Nbr Det N

He Pres work in Sing  Bké

 The Tree Diagram (= Phrase-Marker)
b) He goes to Bouaké
S
Pred
NP

VP

Aux MV
PP
NP
V
MN
Prep
T Nbr

Det N

He Pres go to Sing  Bké

.2-Replacing the VP: The Predicate
 This new solution automatically suggests a more
elegant discrimination in syntactic (structural)
ambiguities in a sentence like :
The policemen struck the gangster with the hammer
That sentence can be interpreted as:
a) The policemen struck the gangster with a hammer,
not with a stick or a brick
a) It is the man holding the hammer that the
policemen struck, not the one who was bare hand
 Two different meanings embodied in the syntactic
make-up of the sentence must be backed to different
Tree Diagrams (Phrase-markers), as follows:
 The Tree Diagram (=Phrase-Marker)
(a) The policemen struck the gangster (with the hammer )
S
NP Pred

VP PP

Aux MV NP
Prep
V NP
MN

T Nbr MN
Nbr Det N
Det N

The policemen Past strike Sing the gangster with sing the hammer
 The Tree Diagram (=Phrase-Marker)
(b) The policemen struck (the gangster with the hammer )
S
NP Pred

VP

Aux MV
V
NP
MN
Nbr
T DET
N
Det PP
Prep NP
MN
Nbr
Det N

The policemen Past strike Sing the with sing the hammer gangster
3.2-Replacing the VP: The Predicate
 The Cycle and Logical Sequencing of Transformations
 The normal and complete cycle of transformation
and their sequencing are as follows:

 TAgr (NP) = Number agreements within the NP(s)

 TAgr(VP) = Number agreement between the subject NP & the verb
 T Aff = Affix transformation
 T Morpho = Morphological transformation
 T Phono = Phonological transformation
 Practice with
Sentence Derivation
now!
3.2-Replacing the VP: The Predicate

1. The girl learned her lessons.

2. The headmaster delivers official diplomas.
3. Her son passed the final exam.
4. Official diplomas are delivered by the
headmaster.
5. They decided on the Renault bus.
6. I talked to the man in the White House.
7. They burnt the chair in the bedroom.
Transformational & Generative Grammar

THE NOTION OF KERNEL

 THE KERNEL SENTENCE (1)
 All the sentences used as illustrations in
Formulation 1 are kernel sentences.
 In TGG, a kernel sentence is a simple
declarative construction with only one
conjugated verb.
 Also known as a basic sentence or a kernel,
a kernel sentence is always active and
affirmative. .
 In fact, the concept of the kernel sentence was
first introduced in 1957 by the linguist Zellig
Harris (the Mentor of Noam Chomsky) and
featured in the early work of Noam Chomsky.
 THE KERNEL SENTENCE (2)
 A kernel sentence does not contain any optional
expression!
 It is simple in the sense that it is unmarked in mood,
therefore, it is indicative.
 It is also unmarked in voice, therefore, it is active
rather than passive.
 And, finally, it is unmarked in polarity, therefore, it is a
positive rather than a negative sentence.
 An example of a kernel sentence is
 'The man opened the door,'
 And an example of a non-kernel sentence is
 'The man did not open the door.
 THE KERNEL SENTENCE (3)
 NB: Even a sentence with an adjective, gerund
or infinitive is not a kernel sentence!

 (i) This is a black cow is made of two

kernel sentences.
This is a cow and The cow is black.
 (ii) I saw them crossing the river is made
of I saw them and They were crossing the river.

 (iii) I want to go is made of I want and I go."

(M.P. Sinha, Modern Linguistics. Atlantic Publishers, 2005)
Transformational & Generative Grammar

THE GENERATIVE
FEATURES
(GENERATIVENESS
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (1)
 One of the characteristics of TG is that it is
`generative'.
 In other words, a grammar must
`generate all and only the grammatical
sentences of a language'.
 It merely means that the grammar must be
so designed that by following its rules and
conventions we can produce all or any of
the possible sentences of the language.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (2)
 TG is a rule-based grammar. Generative rules
share some characteristics of both
prescriptive and descriptive rules.
 They are in the first place instructions like
the prescriptive rules;

 But instead of being instructions for the

production of correct speech, they are
instructions for generating all the possible
sentences of the language.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (3)
 In the second place, like descriptive
rules;

 They relate to the facts of actual

languages, not the invented languages of
grammarians.

 And they are ultimately based, therefore,

upon what people say rather than what
they ought to say.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (4)
 To `generate' is thus to `predict' what
can be the sentences of the language;
 Or to `specify' precisely what are the
possible sentences of the language.
 Thus a grammar should `generate',
`specify‘ & `predict' sentences such as:

 He plays the piano,

but not
 * plays the piano he.
 * He the piano plays.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (5)
 The rules of TG are rewrite rules.

 That is to say, they rewrite one symbol as

another or as several others or one set of
symbols by another until eventually the
sentences of the language are generated.

 The rules start with symbols `S'

(sentence) and then a sequence of rules
rewrite this symbol until a sentence is
produced.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (6)
 Thus, A simple set of rules is as follows, if we wish
to generate a sentence like `A man reads the book'.
 S  NP1 + VP
 NP  Nbr1 + MN1
 MN  Det1 + N1
 VP  Aux + MV
 MV  V + NP. 2
 NP2  Nbr2 + MN2
 MN2 Det2 + N2

 A generative grammar is not concerned with any

actual set of sentences of the language but with the
possible set of sentences.
 We are not, then, concerned or even primarily with
any observed sentences that have occurred, but
rather with those that can or could have occurred.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (7)
 It must attempt to make explicit how a finite
entity (like the brain) can operate on a
finite set of items (words and structures)
and yet generate an infinite set of
sentences.
 The model must parallel the ideal native
speaker’s competence;
 And so it must be capable of generating an
infinite set of sentences by the operation
of a finite set of rules on a finite set of
items.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (8)
 Since the model attempts to describe the
ideal speaker-hearer’s linguistic
knowledge & intuitions, it must be
explicit.
 It must not fall back on intuition to ask
whether a structure is or is not correct.
 If it used intuition to define intuition, the
model would be circular and useless. A TG
model must therefore be explicit and
self-sufficient.
 Its rules alone must allow us to decide
whether a structure is acceptable or not.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (9)
 The advocators of TG point out that any
language consists of an infinite number
of sentences.
 This infinity is a result of what is known as
`recursion’, that we can apply the same
linguistic device over and over again.
 For example,
 This is the house that Jack built.
 This is the corn that lay in the house that Jack built.
 This is the rat that ate the corn that lay in the
house that Jack built.
 GENERATIVE FEATURES (10)
 We can combine ‘ad infinitum'.

 The generative grammar is explicit.

 It explicitly indicates just what are the
possible sentences of the language.
 By its rules and conventions it generates all
the sentences.
 So, its rules and conventions are totally
explicit.
Transformational & Generative Grammar

THE NOTION OF
GRAMMATICALITY
 GRAMMATICALITY (1)
 One basic concept that often gives rise to
unfortunate misunderstanding is that of
Grammaticality.
 In this connection, it is important not to confuse the
descriptive notion grammatical with the
corresponding prescriptive notion correct.
 Chomsky argued that the notions "grammatical"
and "ungrammatical" could be defined in a
meaningful and useful way.
 According to Chomsky, it is possible for a
sentence to be both grammatical and
meaningless;
 As in his famous example,
 “Colourless green ideas sleep furiously”.
 GRAMMATICALITY (2)
 He argued that the intuition of a native
speaker is enough to define the
grammaticalness of a sentence;
 This means that if a particular string of
English words displays some wrongness for
a native English-speaker;
 Relying on his competence, he can say that
the string of words is ungrammatical;
 According to Chomsky, this is entirely
distinct from the question of whether a
sentence is meaningful or can be
understood.
Transformational & Generative Grammar

TRANSFORMATIONAL
FEATURES
TRANSFORMATIONAL FEATURES (1)
 Essentially, transformation is a method of
stating how the structures of many
sentences in languages can be generated;
 It also state how sentences can be
explained formally as the result of specific
transformations applied to certain basic
sentence structures.
 Transformational rules are not strictly
necessary for the purpose of generating the
set of grammatical sentences in a language,
since that can be done using Phrase
Structure Rules alone.
TRANSFORMATIONAL FEATURES (2)
 But the use of transformations provides
economy in some cases (the total number of
rules can thus be reduced);
 It also provides a way of representing
the grammatical relations that exist
between sentences, which would not
otherwise be reflected in a system with
phrase structure rules alone.
 The transformational syntax presupposes
a certain amount of phrase structure
grammar of the immediate constituent type
to provide the basis of the `kernel' from
which transformations start.
TRANSFORMATIONAL FEATURES (3)

 Chomsky’s grammar is a transformational

one because it contains Transformational
Rules, which are used to convert a deep
structure into a surface.

 The Deep Structure can be considered as

the Input, the Generative and
Transformational Rules correspond to the
Processing, and the Surface Structure is
the Output.
TRANSFORMATIONAL FEATURES (4)
Deep structure (DS) = “The child reads the
book”.
Transformational Passive (DS) = “The
book is read by the child”.
Transformational Negative (DS) = “The
child does not read the book”.
Transformational Interrogative (DS) =
“Does the child read the book?”
Transformational Assertive (DS) = “The
child does read the book”.
Transformational & Generative Grammar

THE NOTION OF
UNIVERSAL
GRAMMAR
 UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR (1)
 The notion of Universal Grammar
was developed by Chomsky in
Principles & Parameters in 1979.
 It deals with principles & parameters
that are universal to human
languages.
 It hypothesizes that any attempt to
explain the syntax of a particular
language using a principle or
parameter is cross-examined with the
evidence available in other languages.
 UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR (2)
 This approach is able to account for
differences among languages while
maintaining the idea that all languages are
cut from the same cloth, whose nature is
determined by the innately-given principles of
Universal Grammar or UG.
 The inter-relatedness of Universals and
Innate Knowledge leads to the conclusion
that we can uncover universal properties of
language by detailed studies of the grammar
of one Particular Language.
 UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR (3)
 Chomsky stated that whatever knowledge a
native speaker has about his language which
he cannot have acquired through experience
must be attributable to innate knowledge;
 And whatever is innate must therefore
be universal (at least, if we assume that the
innate language faculty does not vary
significantly from one individual to another).
 In following examples:
 (a) I wonder who the men expected to see them
 (b) The men expected to see them
 UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR (4)
 In the first example, the pronoun them can
be interpreted as refereing to the men, but
not in the second example;
 Chomsky argues that neither children
acquiring English as their first language nor
those learning it as a second language have
to learn the principles governing the
interpretation of pronouns in such cases.
 He asks rhetorically: ‘How does every child
know, unerringly, to interpret the clause
differently in the two cases?
 UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR (5)
 And why does no pedagogical grammar
have to draw the learner’s attention to such
facts?
 The implicit answer is that the relevant
principles of interpretation are innate,
and hence ‘known without relevant
experience’.
 Chomsky said that ‘the study of one
language may provide crucial evidence
concerning the structure of some other
language’
 TD: Provide an answer to the
following questions
1- What is the main criticism raised by the advocators of
TGG against Structural Linguistics? According to them, what
should a sound theory be able to do?
2- Chomsky claims that his Grammar is a generative one.
What is the meaning that he gave to the verb “generate”?
3- Account for the process through which the sentence
production unfolds, according to Transformational &
Generative Grammar.
4- Show the difference between “competence” and
“performance” as advocated by Chomsky in his grammar.

5- “No language is easier or more difficult than other

languages.” How far is this statement true in light of TGG
model?
End of
Session
Thank you for
your friendly
Attention !