6Transformationalgrammar转换生成语法.docx

6Transformationalgrammar转换生成语法6Transformationalgrammar转换生成语法 编辑整理：尊敬的读者朋友们：这里是精品文档编辑中心，本文档内容是由我和我的同事精心编辑整理后发布的，发布之前我们对文中内容进行仔细校对，但是难免会有疏漏的地方，但是任然希望（6Transformationalgrammar转换生成语法）的内容能够给您的工作和学习带来便利同时也真诚的希望收到您的建议和反馈，这将是我们进步的源泉，前进的动力本文可编辑可修改，如果觉得对您有帮助请收藏以便随时查阅，最后祝您生活愉快 业绩进步，以下为6Transformationalgrammar转换生成语法的全部内容Transformational grammarFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, searchIn linguistics, a transformational grammar or transformational-generative grammar (TGG） is a generative grammar, especially of a natural language, that has been developed in the Chomskyan tradition of phrase structure grammars （as opposed to dependency grammars). Additionally， transformational grammar is the tradition that gives rise to specific transformational grammars. Much current research in transformational grammar is inspired by Chomsky’s Minimalist Program.[1］Contents［hide］ · 1 Deep structure and surface structure· 2 Formal definition· 3 Development of basic concepts· 4 Innate linguistic knowledge· 5 Grammatical theories· 6 ”I-Language” and ”E-Language"· 7 Grammaticality· 8 Minimalism· 9 Mathematical representation· 10 Transformations· 11 See also· 12 References· 13 External links[edit] Deep structure and surface structureIn 1957, Noam Chomsky published Syntactic Structures， in which he developed the idea that each sentence in a language has two levels of representation — a deep structure and a surface structure.[2]［3] The deep structure represented the core semantic relations of a sentence， and was mapped on to the surface structure （which followed the phonological form of the sentence very closely) via transformations。

Chomsky believed there are considerable similarities between languages’ deep structures， and that these structures reveal properties, common to all languages that surface structures conceal. However, this may not have been the central motivation for introducing deep structure Transformations had been proposed prior to the development of deep structure as a means of increasing the mathematical and descriptive power of context-free grammars Similarly， deep structure was devised largely for technical reasons relating to early semantic theory. Chomsky emphasizes the importance of modern formal mathematical devices in the development of grammatical theory：But the fundamental reason for ［the］ inadequacy of traditional grammars is a more technical one. Although it was well understood that linguistic processes are in some sense "creative," the technical devices for expressing a system of recursive processes were simply not available until much more recently。

In fact， a real understanding of how a language can (in Humboldt’s words） "make infinite use of finite means" has developed only within the last thirty years， in the course of studies in the foundations of mathematics—Aspects of the Theory of Syntax［edit］ Formal definitionChomsky’s advisor， Zellig Harris, took transformations to be relations between sentences such as ”I finally met this talkshow host you always detested” and simpler (kernel) sentences ”I finally met this talkshow host” and ”You always detested this talkshow host"。

Chomsky developed a formal theory of grammar where transformations manipulated not just the surface strings， but the parse tree associated to them, making transformational grammar a system of tree automata.[4］ This definition proved adequate for subsequent versions including the `extended’， `revised extended'， and `Government-Binding' (GB） versions of generative grammar, but may no longer be sufficient for the current minimalist grammar in that merge may require a formal definition that goes beyond the tree manipulation characteristic of Move α。

[edit] Development of basic conceptsThough transformations continue to be important in Chomsky's current theories, he has now abandoned the original notion of Deep Structure and Surface Structure Initially， two additional levels of representation were introduced （LF — Logical Form， and PF — Phonetic Form)， and then in the 1990s Chomsky sketched out a new program of research known as Minimalism， in which Deep Structure and Surface Structure no longer featured and PF and LF remained as the only levels of representation。

To complicate the understanding of the development of Noam Chomsky's theories， the precise meanings of Deep Structure and Surface Structure have changed over time — by the 1970s， the two were normally referred to simply as D-Structure and S—Structure by Chomskyan linguists In particular, the idea that the meaning of a sentence was determined by its Deep Structure (taken to its logical conclusions by the generative semanticists during the same period） was dropped for good by Chomskyan linguists when LF took over this role （previously， Chomsky and Ray Jackendoff had begun to argue that meaning was determined by both Deep and Surface Structure）.[5］［6］［edit] In。