Transcript Chapter 12 Theories

Chapter 12
Theories & Schools
of
Modern Linguistics

Functionalism

Formalism
0. Contribution of Ferdinand de
Saussure


“Father of modern linguistics”
Course in General Linguistics, in 1916

This book became the most important source of
Saussure’s ideas and of his influence upon
succeeding generations of linguists.

His influence


He provided a general orientation of the task of
linguistics.
He influenced modern linguistics in the specific
concepts




Arbitrary nature of the sign
Langue vs. parole
Synchrony vs. diachrony
Syntagmatic relation vs. paradigmatic relation

Saussure believed that L is A SYSTEM OF
SIGNS. The sign is the union of a form and
an idea, which Saussure called the
SIGNIFIER and the SIGNIFIED. The relation
between the signifier and the signified is
arbitrary and conventional.
Langue & parole

Saussure distinguished the linguistic
competence of the speaker and the actual
phenomena or data of linguistics (utterances) as
langue and parole.

Langue is relative stable and systematic, parole is
subject to personal and situational constraints;
langue is not spoken by an individual, parole is
always a naturally occurring event. What a linguist
should do, according to Saussure, is to draw rules
from a mass of confused facts, i.e. to discover the
regularities governing all instances of parole and
make them the subject of linguistics.
More about langue and parole
For Saussure, langue is stable and invariable
while parole is unstable and variable. By
designing and building models of langue, one is
not principally concerned with actual systems of
parole, or what people actually say or what
appears on the page, but the structures of a
system that gives the potential
for the words or utterances to exist.

This principle is the key to understanding
structuralism


A synchronic description takes a fixed
instant (usually, but not necessarily, the
present) as its point of observation. Most
grammars are of this kind.
Diachronic linguistics is the study of a
language through the course of its history.

SYNTAGMATIC RELATIONS: the relationship that
linguistic units (e.g. words, clauses) have with
other units in a sequence. For example, a word
may be said to have syntagmatic relations with
the other words which occur in the same
sentence, but PARADIGMATIC RELATIONS with the
words that could substitute for it in the sentence.
For example:
I
gave
Tracy
the
book.
Passed
Handed
=syntagmatic relations
=Paradigmatic relations
Threw
1. The
Prague School
1.1 The Prague School

Prague Linguistic Circle:


Started by V. Mathesius in 1926, with Jacobson,
Trubetzkoy and Firbas
The Circle stood at the heart of important
developments in structural linguistics and
semiotics in the 1930's.

Three important points:



SYNCHRONIC study of L is stressed for it can draw
on complete and controllable material for
investigation.
L is SYSTEMIC in that no element of L can be
satisfactorily analyzed or evaluated in isolation and
assessment can only be made if its relationship is
established with the coexisting elements in the
same language system.
L is FUNCTIONAL in that it is a tool for performing a
number of essential functions or tasks for the
community using it.
1.2 Prague School: Phonology

N. Trubetzkoy: Principle of
Phonology (1939).



Phonetics vs. phonology: parole vs.
langue.
Phoneme: an abstract unit of the
sound system; to distinguish
meaning
Classifying distinctive features:
phonological oppositions.
Trubetzkoy’s contributions




Showed distinctive functions of speech
sounds and gave an accurate definition of
the phoneme.
Defined the sphere of phonological studies
be making the distinction between phonetics
and phonology.
Revealed interdependent relations between
phonemes by studying the syntagmatic and
paradigmatic relations between phonemes.
Put forward a set of methodologies for
phonological studies.
1.3 Functional Sentence
Perspective

FSP is a theory of linguistic analysis which
refers to an analysis of utterances in terms
of the information they contain. The principle
is that the role of each utterance part is
evaluated for its semantic contribution to the
whole.

A functional point of view


A sentence contains a point of departure
and a goal of discourse. The point of
departure, called the theme, is the ground
on which the speaker and the hearer meet.
The goal of discourse, called the rheme,
presents the very information that is to be
imparted to the hearer.

Movement from theme to rheme reveals the
movement of the mind itself.


Therefore, the functional sentence perspective
(FSP) aims to describe how information is
distributed in sentences.
It deals particularly with the effect of the
distribution of known (given) info and new info in
discourse.

Sally

Theme
Rheme
On the table stands Sally.
Theme
stands on the table.
Rheme
Communicative dynamism (CD)


J. Firbas
Linguistic communication is
dynamic, not static.

CD measures the amount of info an
element carries in a sentence. The
degree of CD is the effect
contributed by a linguistic element,
for it pushes the communication
forwards. For example,

He was cross.

CD: The lowest degree of
CD is carried by he, and
the highest degree of CD
is carried by cross, with
the degree carried by
was ranking between
them.

Normally the subject carries a lower degree of
CD than the verb and/or the object and/or
adverbial provided either the verb or the
object and/or adverbial are contextually
independent.

This is because a known or unknown agent
expressed by the subject appears to be
communicatively less important than an
unknown action expressed by the finite verb
and/or an unknown goal (object or adverbial of
place) at or towards which the action is directed.

For example,


A man broke into the house and
stole all the money.
The ultimate purpose of the
communication is to state the
action and/or its goal, not the
agent.

However, if the subject is followed by a verb
expressing “existence or appearance on the
scene” and is contextually independent,
then it will carry the highest degree of CD,
because an unknown person or thing
appearing on the scene is communicatively
more important than the act of appearing
and the scene itself, e.g.

An old man appeared in the waiting room at five
o’clock.

If the subject is contextually
dependent, a contextually
independent adverbial of
time or place becomes an
important local and temporal
specification, carrying greater
degree of CD than both the
subject and the finite verb, as
in

The old man was sitting in the
waiting room.

CD is both related to the semantic contents
and the linear arrangement of the elements.
Compare:




He went to Prague to see his friend.
In order to see his friend, he went to Prague.
He gave a boy an apple.
He gave an apple to a boy.
Three levels of a sentence




Grammatical Sentence Pattern (GSP)
Semantic Sentence Pattern (SSP)
Communicative Sentence Pattern (CSP)
John has writtena novel.
Subject Verb
Object
Agent Action
Goal
Theme Transition
Rheme
(GSP)
(SSP)
(CSP)
2 The London School



B. Malinowski (1884-1942), professor of
anthropology (1927).
J. R. Firth (1890-1960), the first
professor of linguistics in the UK (1944).
M. A. K. Halliday (1925- ), student of
Firth.


All three stressed the importance of context
of situation and the system aspect of L.
London school is also known as systemic
linguistics and functional linguistics.
2.1 Malinowski’s theories

Paved the way for a cultural,
contextual study of L in Britain.



Language “is to be regarded as a
mode of action, rather than as a
counterpart of thought”.
The meaning of an utterance
comes from its relation to the
situational context in which it
occurs.
The real linguistic data are the
complete utterances in actual uses
of L.

Three types of situational context:


situations in which speech interrelates with
bodily activity;
narrative situations;



The situation of the moment of narration
The situation referred to by the narrative
situations in which speech is used to fill a
speech vacuum—phatic communion.
2.2 Firth’s theories
About L: L is a social process, a
means of social life.


In order to live, human beings
have to learn and learning L is a
means of participation in social
activities.
L is a means of doing things and
of making others do things, a
means of acting and living.

Firth did not fully agree with Saussure on the
distinction of langue and parole.



L is not a set of conventional semiotics and signs.
The objects of linguistic study is L in use.
The goal of linguistic enquiry is to analyse
meaningful elements of L in order to establish
corresponding relations between linguistic and
non-linguistic elements.
(1) Meaning and context of situation

Firth held that meaning is use, thus defining
meaning as the relationship between an
element at any level and its context on that
level. The meaning of any sentence can be
analyzed on five levels: (1) phonological, (2)
lexical and semantic, (3) morphological, (4)
syntactic, and (5) context of situation.


Firth expanded Malinowski’s ideas of
context of situation.
He defined the context of situation as
including the entire cultural setting of
speech and the personal history of the
participants rather than as simply the
context of human activity going on at the
moment.


Recognizing that context is infinitely various, he
used the notion of typical context of situation so
that some generalizations can be made about it.
By a TYPICAL CONTEXT OF SITUATION, he meant
that social situations determine the social roles
participants are obliged to play; since the total
number of typical contexts of situation they will
encounter is finite, the total number of social
roles is also finite.

For this reason, he said “conversation is much
more of a roughly prescribed ritual than most
people think. once someone speaks to you, you
are in a relatively determined context and you
are not free just to say what you please.”

In analysing typical context of situation, one has
to take into consideration both the situational
context and linguistic context:
Internal relations of the text:


syntagmatic relations in structure
paradigmatic relations in system
Internal relations of the context of situation:


relations between text and non-linguistic
elements
analytical relations between elements of the text
and elements within the situation

He also proposed a model covering both the
situational context and the linguistic context
of a text
1.
2.
3.
The relevant features of the participants:
persons, personalities.
The relevant topics, including objects, events,
and non-linguistic, non-human events.
The effects of the verbal action.
(2) Prosodic analysis: prosodic phonology

Since any human utterance is continuous
speech flow made up of at least one syllable,
it cannot be cut into independent units. Mere
phonetic and phonological descriptions are
insufficient. For example, to describe key



Phonetically: voiceless, velar, stop
Phonologically: two phonemes /k/ and /i:/, /k jh/
(palatalized, aspirated)
Prosodically: h
(h aspirated
ki:
both phonemes)



It is not phonemes that make up the
paradigmatic relations, but Phonematic Units.
There are fewer features in phonematic units
than in phonemes, because some features are
common to phonemes of a syllable or a phrase
(even a sentence).
When these common features are considered in
syntagmatic relations, they are called prosodic
units.
Phonematic units=phoneme-common features
(prosodic features)

He did not define prosodic units, but his
discussion indicates that they include such
features as stress, length, nasalisation,
palatalisation, and aspiration.

Prosodic analysis and phonemic analysis both
consider basically the same phonological
facts. However, prosodic analysis is
advantageous in categorizing data and
revealing the relations between linguistic data.

It can discover units on various levels and
attempts to explicate the interrelationships
between units on these levels.
2.3 Systemic-functional grammar


M A K Halliday (1925- ).
Two components and
inseparable parts:


systemic grammar: internal
relations in L as a system
network
functional grammar: L as a
means of social interaction,
functions of language form




What is systemic-functional grammar?
p.307
In what aspects is systemic grammar different
from other linguistic theories?
pp.307-308
System: a set of choices available in a L. there
are many systems in every L. the whole L is
conceived as a “system of systems”. Some of
the systems in English are number, person,
mood, gender, tense, transitivity, etc.
We make choices along the SCALE OF DELICACY
and gradually make finer and finer distinctions
in meaning.
Systemic grammar
finite…
clause
group
word …
nonfinite…
nominal-group…
adjectival-adverbial-group…
prep-phrase…
Functional grammar



Ideational function (experiential & logical): to
convey new info, communicate a content
unknown to the hearer
Interpersonal function: to express social and
personal relations
Textual function: to make any stretch of
spoken or written discourse into a coherent
and unified text and make a living passage
different from a random list of sentences.
Realization of each meta-function:



The ideational function mainly consists of
“transitivity” and “voice”
The interpersonal function is realized by mood
and modality
The textual function is realized through cohesion,
theme/rheme, stress, etc.
3. American structuralism
Boas’ contribution to American linguistics



The organizer of the survey of many indigenous
American Indian L.
There were no ideal type of L, for human L is
diverse.
He proved that the structure and form of a L has
nothing to do with the evolution of a race and the
development of its culture.

He discussed the framework of descriptive
linguistics.




Three parts: the sound, the semantic categories of
linguistic expression, and the process of grammatical
combination in semantic expression.
The task is to discover the particular grammatical
structure and to develop descriptive categories
appropriate to it.
Analytic method rather than comparing in processing data
His theory, observation and descriptive method
paved the way for American descriptive
linguistics and influenced generations of
linguists.
Sapir’s contributions



Defined L as “a purely human and noninstinctive
method of communicating ideas, emotions and
desires by means of a system of voluntarily
produced symbols”.
L is the means, thought is the product; without L,
thought is impossible.
Noticed the universal features of L.
Bloomfield

a landmark figure in the history of American
linguistics; started American structuralism as
a school of thought
Bloomfield’ theory

L is a branch of psycholinguistics, esp. of
Behaviorism




Learning and using L is a process of stimulusresponse.
Three principles (pp.320-321)
S
r……………………..s
R
He applied linguistics to L teaching.


Learning a L involves constant practice and
repetition in real situations rather than merely
teaching grammatical rules.
We learn a L rather than learn about a L.
Post-Bloomfieldian linguistics






Further developed structuralism which is
characterized by a strict empiricism.
Focused on direct observation.
Harris: discovery procedure approach, accurate
analytical procedure and high degree of
formalization
Hockett: defended structuralist views of L
Pike: Tagmemics
Lamb: stratificational analysis

Summary of American structuralism
pp.325-326
4. Generative Grammar

NOAM CHOMSKY
(1928- ), institute
professor at MIT.
Linguist, philosopher,
and political activist.
4.1 Innateness hypothesis



Language acquisition device (LAD)
Universal grammar (UG)
Three components of LAD




Hypothesis-maker
Linguistic universal
Evaluation procedure
Anti-behaviorism, and anti-empiricism
4.2 what is generative grammar?


Pp.327-328.
Three levels to evaluate grammars on:




Observational adequacy
Descriptive adequacy
Explanatory adequacy
Hypothesis-Deduction method
4.3 the classical theory

Three kinds of grammar




Finite state grammar
Phrase structure grammar
Transformational grammar
Three features



Emphasis on generative ability of L
Introduction of transformational rules
Grammatical description regardless of meaning.
Phrase structure rules

Consists of phrase-structure rules that formalize
some of the traditional insights of constituent
structure analysis. The rules are as follows:





S  NP VP
VP  V NP
NP  Det N
V  act, beat, catch, dive, …
N  man, boy, book, flower, ...
Transformational rules




NP1 + Aux + V + NP2

John + will + write + a story
NP2 + Aux + be + en + V + by + NP1
a story + will + be + en + write + by + John
4.4 The standard theory (1965)
• Problems with the classical theory
the TR are not universally applicable. The TR
should not change the meaning of the original
sentence, and the noun must be restricted by
the verb.
• Including a semantic component in a threecomponent grammar
4.4 The standard theory
(1965)

Improvement on the classical theory





Only allowed to change the forms not the
meaning.
Selectional restrictions to limit the nouns
Restrictions on transformations
Adding the symbol S on the right of the arrow to
allow sentenced to be embedded.
Rules are ordered.
4.5 Extended standard theory

Problems with standard theory





TR are too powerful
Difficult to generalize the relations between
derived nouns and their corresponding verbs
Impossible for semantic interpretation intact from
DS to SS
Cannot explain some gapped structures
Restrictions needed for TR
4.6 Later theories

Government and Binding Theory







X-bar theory
Government theory
Binding theory
Case theory
-theory
Bounding theory
Control theory
Main features of TG





L as a set of rules
The aim of linguistic study is to produce
generative grammar to capture learners’ L
competence
Using intuition to choose data
Methodology is hypothesis-deductive
Rationalism & mentalism



The minimalist program
The development of TG
Major features of TG grammar
p. 338.


Case grammar (pp. 339-40.)
Generative semantics (pp.340-42)