Harris, Chomsky and the origins of transformational grammar

IF 0.3 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
G. Graffi
{"title":"Harris, Chomsky and the origins of transformational grammar","authors":"G. Graffi","doi":"10.1075/LI.39.1.03GRA","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to Chomsky’s report of the mid 1970s, he and Harris developed their theories in an essentially independent way; whereas according to some statements by Harris, some contact actually took place between them. To shed light on this issue, it may be useful to systematically compare their respective views of the notion ‘transformation’ as well as their analyses of certain syntactic phenomena. Among the topics dealt with in the present article are: the system of syntactic categories and their symbols; the notion of ‘zero elements’; the phenomenon of discontinuous constituents; the English auxiliary system; wh -constructions; the typology of transformations; the notions of ‘kernel’ and ‘kernel sentence’. Several of these analyses show many points of contact between the two scholars (e.g., the analysis of wh -constructions or that of English auxiliaries), which allow us to maintain that they surely influenced each other. The overall differences between the two models are also clear: the transformational relation holds between sentences in Harris’s framework, while it holds between underlying strings on the one hand and actual sentences on the other in Chomsky’s. As a consequence of this different view of the notion of transformation, two problems which were fundamental for Chomsky had no importance for Harris, namely the order of transformations and the distinction between optional and obligatory transformations. It can therefore be concluded that, if the two scholars certainly influenced each other when they were working out their respective transformational theories, their theoretical views were acutely different almost from the beginning.","PeriodicalId":43668,"journal":{"name":"Linguisticae Investigationes","volume":"39 1","pages":"48-87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1075/LI.39.1.03GRA","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguisticae Investigationes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/LI.39.1.03GRA","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to Chomsky’s report of the mid 1970s, he and Harris developed their theories in an essentially independent way; whereas according to some statements by Harris, some contact actually took place between them. To shed light on this issue, it may be useful to systematically compare their respective views of the notion ‘transformation’ as well as their analyses of certain syntactic phenomena. Among the topics dealt with in the present article are: the system of syntactic categories and their symbols; the notion of ‘zero elements’; the phenomenon of discontinuous constituents; the English auxiliary system; wh -constructions; the typology of transformations; the notions of ‘kernel’ and ‘kernel sentence’. Several of these analyses show many points of contact between the two scholars (e.g., the analysis of wh -constructions or that of English auxiliaries), which allow us to maintain that they surely influenced each other. The overall differences between the two models are also clear: the transformational relation holds between sentences in Harris’s framework, while it holds between underlying strings on the one hand and actual sentences on the other in Chomsky’s. As a consequence of this different view of the notion of transformation, two problems which were fundamental for Chomsky had no importance for Harris, namely the order of transformations and the distinction between optional and obligatory transformations. It can therefore be concluded that, if the two scholars certainly influenced each other when they were working out their respective transformational theories, their theoretical views were acutely different almost from the beginning.
哈里斯,乔姆斯基和转换语法的起源
根据乔姆斯基20世纪70年代中期的报告,他和哈里斯以一种本质上独立的方式发展了他们的理论;而根据哈里斯的一些陈述,他们之间确实发生了一些接触。为了阐明这一问题,系统地比较他们各自对“转换”概念的看法以及对某些句法现象的分析可能会有所帮助。本文讨论的主题包括:句法范畴及其符号系统;零元素的概念;不连续成分现象;英语辅助系统;wh结构;变换的类型学;"核"和"核句"的概念。这些分析中有几个显示了两位学者之间的许多接触点(例如,对wh结构或英语助词的分析),这使我们能够坚持他们肯定相互影响。这两种模型之间的总体差异也很明显:在哈里斯的框架中,转换关系在句子之间成立,而在乔姆斯基的框架中,转换关系在底层字符串和实际句子之间成立。由于这种对转换概念的不同看法,两个对乔姆斯基至关重要的问题对哈里斯来说并不重要,即转换的顺序和可选和强制性转换之间的区别。因此可以得出结论,如果两位学者在各自的转型理论的形成过程中确实相互影响,那么他们的理论观点几乎从一开始就截然不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Linguisticae Investigationes
Linguisticae Investigationes LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: Lingvisticæ Investigationes publishes original articles dealing with the lexicon, grammar, phonology and semantics. It focuses on studies that are formalized to the point where they can be integrated into text analysis software, and on studies which describe resources such as grammars and electronic dictionaries constructed on a linguistic basis. Articles may deal with any language, though a large proportion are devoted to the study of French. The journal also publishes bibliographies, summaries of theses, reports, squibs and reviews. Contributions are in English and French. French-speaking authors are free to submit in French or in English. The journal has an accompanying book series entitled Lingvisticæ Investigationes Supplementa .
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信