ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I would like to
express my greatful because of the our Almighty God goodness so that I be able
to finish this paper on the time. I also would like to thank for all the people
who help me and support me to compile this paper.
In this opprtunity, I would like to
thank to our lecturer Dumaris Silalahi, M. Pd because of her understanding to
give me much time finishing this paper. Additionally, I do this paper in
condition to complete my final task in this semester.
While compiling this paper I realize
that there is many mistakes, because of that so I am so thankfull if you have
critiques and advice for the perfectness this paper later. And for the last I
would like to say thank for your attention.
Pematangsiantar, July 31st 2014
Compiled
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
A.
HISTORY OF SYNTAX . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
CHAPTER II DISCUSSION
A.
DEFENITION OF SYNTAX . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
B.
TRANSFORMATIONAL
GRAMMAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
C.
GENERATIVE GRAMMAR . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
D.
FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
CHAPTER III CLOSING
A.
CONCLUSION . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
PREFERENCE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A.
HISTORY
OF SYNTAX
Works on grammar were being written
long before modern syntax came about is often cited as an axample of a
pre-modern work that approaches the sophistication of a modern sintactic
theory. In the West, the school of thought that came to be known as traditional
grammar began with the work of Dionysius Thrax.
For centuries, work in syntax was
dominated by a framework known as generative genera. First expounded in 1660 by
Antoine Arnauld in a book of the same tittle. This system took as its basic
permise the assumption that language is a direct reflection of thought
processesand therefore there is a single, most natural way to express a
thought. That way, coincidentally, was exactly the way it eas expressed in
French. However, in the 19th century, wirh the development of
historical-comperative linguistics, linguists began to realize sheer diversity
of human language, and to question fundamental assumptions about the
relationship between language and logic. It became apparent that there was no
such thing as a most natural way to express a thought, and therefore logic
could no longer be relied upon as a basis for studying the structure of
language.
There are a number of theoretical
approaches to the discipline of syntax. Many linguists see syntax as a branch
of biology, since they conceive of syntax as the study of linguistics knowledge
as embodied in the human mind. Others take a more platonistic view, since they
regard syntax to be the study of an abstract formal system. Yet others consider
grammar as a taxonomical device to reach broad generalizations across
languages.
CHAPTER
II
DISCUSSION
A.
DEFENITION
OF SYNTAX
Basically, syntax is the rules by which signs
are combined to make statements. If you consider the words of a language to be
its signs, then its syntax is the rules which put signs together to make
statements, ask questions, and produce other utterances. Syntax incorporates
the grammar of phrases, clauses, and sentences. Producing and uttering
sentences is an important part of how we make sense of our world. We articulate
the meaning of our experience in words; in the process of articulate, we make
(or discover) the meaning of the experience. This process is similar to the
ways in which we intrepret
literature. The syntax the exact structure of what we write is an essential
part of its meaning. Change the structure and you have changed the meaning, at
least slightly.
In linguistics, syntax is the study of the
principles and rules for constructing sentences in natural languages. In
addition to referring to the discipline, the term syntax is also used to refer
directly to the rules and principles that govern the sentence structure of any
individual language. Modern research in syntax attempts to describe languages
in term of such rules. Linguistics in this discipline attempt to find general rules that apply to all natural
languages.
Syntax
and sentence are the part that cannot be part. A sentence is a sequence of words whose first word starts with
a capital letter and whose last word is followed by an end punctuation mark
(period/full stop, question mark or exclamation mark). All sentences are about something or someone. The something or
someone that the sentence is about is called the subject of the
sentence. Examples:
John often comes late to
class.
My friend and I both have a dog named
Spot.
Many parts of the
Asian coastline were destroyed by a tsunami in 2004.
Lying on the sofa
watching old films is my favorite hobby.
Sentences
consist of words. These words are arranged into groups of varying size, called
constituent. The structure of constituents is a tree. We shall show how to
define the notion of constituent and constituent occurence solely in terms of
sentences. For example: in sentence This
villa costs a fortune.
S
Np Vp
D N V Dp
D N
This villa costs a fortune
Now
that we have constituents, let us go to our tree. Each of nodes in that tree is
a constituent, hence belongs to some category. Omitting some detail, the
categories phrase, S a sentence, D a determiner, DP a determiner phrase, NP a
noun phrase, VP a verb phrase, V a verb.
B. TRANSFORMATIONAL GRAMMAR\
In linguistics, a
transformational grammar (TG) is a generative
grammar, especially of a natural language,
that has been developed in the syntactic
structures of phrase
structure grammars (as opposed to dependency
grammars). Transformational grammar is the tradition
of specific transformational grammars. Much current Deep structure and surface structure.
In 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.
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
that there would be considerable similarities between languages' deep
structures, and that these structures would reveal properties, common to all
languages, which were concealed by their surface structures. However, this was
perhaps not 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.
·
Deep structure: the underlying
structure of a sentence that conveys the meaning of a sentence.
·
Surface structure: the superficial arrangement of constituents and
reflects the order in which the words are pronounced.
Three arguments for
usefulness of distinction:
- First, deep-structure ambiguity
- Second, underlying structure
- Third, active vs. passive
Transformational rules (transformations) applied to the deep structure and the intermediate
structures, ultimately generating the surface structure of the sentence. Derivational Theory of Complexity (DTC) is the distance between surface and deep structure
would be an accurate index of the psychological complexity.
In
linguistics, and especially the study of syntax, the deep structure of a
linguistics expression is a theoretical construct that seek to unify several
related structures. For example, the sentences “pat love chris” and “Chris
is love by Pat” mean roughly the same thing and use similar words. Some
linguists, in particular Noam Chomsky, have tried to account for this
similarity by positing that these two sentences are distinct surface forms that
derive from a common deep structure.
C. GENERATIVE GRAMMAR
Generative
grammar is the rules determining the structure and interpretation of sentences that
speakers accept as belonging to the language. A model of psychological system
of unconscious knowledge that underlies a speaker’s ability to produce and interpret
utterances in a language. Underlying thesis of generative grammar is that sentences are generated by a subconscious set of
procedures (like computer programs). Prescriptive rules “use whom not who,” descriptive rules
describe how people actually speak, whether or not they are speaking “correctly.” Generative grammar claims to be a theory of
cognitive psychology, It is a model of the psychology of Language.
When generative grammar was first proposed, it was
widely hailed as a way of formalizing the implicit set of rules a person
"knows" when they know their native language and produce grammatical
utterances in it (grammaticality intuitions). However
Chomsky has repeatedly rejected that interpretation; according to him, the
grammar of a language is a statement of what it is that a person has to know in
order to recognize an utterance as grammatical, but not a hypothesis about the
processes involved in either understanding or producing language.
The
hypotesis of generative grammar is that language is a structure of the human
mind. The goal of generative grammar is to make a complete model of this inner
language (known as i-language). This model could be used to describe all human
language and to predict the grammatically of any given utterance. This approach
to language was pioneered by Hoam Chomsky. Most generative theories assume that
syntax is based upon the constituent structure of sentences. Generative grammars
are among the theories that focus primarily on the form of a sentence, rather
than its communicative function. For example:
·
"I like her cooking" has different
meanings because it has different deep structures though only one surface
structure.
·
"The boy will read the book" and "The
book will be read by the boy" have different surface structures, but one and
the same deep structure, hence they have the same meaning.
D. FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR
Functional grammar is a model of grammar motivated by funtions. The
model was originally developed by Simon C. Dik at the University of amsterdam
in the 1970s, and has undergone several revisions ever since. The latest
standard version under the original name is laid out in the two volume,
published shortly after Dik’s death.
The notion of function in FG generalizes the standard distinction of
grammatical functions such as subject and object. Constituent of a linguistic
utterance are assigned three tyoes or level of functions:
Semantic function describing the role of participants in states of
affairs of actions expressed.
Syntactic functions defining different perpectives in the presentation
of a linguistics expression.
Pragmatic functions defininf the informational status of constituents
determined by the pragmatic context of the verbal interaction.
Functional theories of grammar are those
approaches to the study of language that see the functions of language and its
elements to be the key to understanding linguistic processes and structures.
Functional theories of language propose that
since language is fundamentally a tool, it is reasonable to assume that its
structures are best analyzed and understood with reference to the functions
they carry out.
Functional theories of grammar differ from
formal theories of grammar, in that the latter seeks to define the different
elements of language and describe the way they relate to each other as systems
of formal rules or operations, whereas the former defines the functions
performed by language and then relates these functions to the linguistic
elements that carry them out. This means that functional theories of grammar tend to
pay attention to the way language is actually used in communicative context,
and not just to the formal relations between linguistic elements.
Several distinct grammatical theories that employ a
functional approach:
1)
The structuralist functionalism of the Prague
school, was the earliest functionalist framework in the 1920s.
2)
Simon Dik’s functional discourse grammar,
originally developed in the 1970s and 80s. It has also been continuously
developed by Linguist such as Kees Hengeveld.
3)
Michael Haliday’s systemic functional
grammar. Haliday draws on the work of
Buhler and Malinowski.
Structuralism is a
theoretical paradigm that emphasizes that elements of culture must be understood in terms of their
relationships to a larger oversearching system of structure. Alternately, as
summarized by philosophers Simon Blackburn; Structuralism is “the belief that
phenomena of human life are not intelligible except through their
interrelations. These relations constitue a structure and behind local
variations in the surface phenomena there are constant laws of abstract
culture. Structuralism originated in the early 1900s in the structural
linguistics of Ferdinand de Sausure and the subsequent Prague, Moscow and
Copenhagen linguistics. In the late 1950s and early 60s, when structural
linguistics was facing serious challenges from the likes of Noam Chomsky and
thus fading in importance in linguistics, an array of scholars in the
humanities, borrowed Sausure’s concepts for use in their respective field of
study. French anthropologist Claude Levi- Strauss was arguably the 1st
scholar, sparking a widespread interest in Structuralism.
CHAPTER
III
CLOSING
A.
CONCLUSION
Syntax
is the study of the principles and rules for constructing sentencs in natural
languages. In addition to referring to the discipline, the term syntax is also
used to refer directly to the rules and principles that govern the sentence
structure of any individual language. Modern research in syntax attempts to
describe languages in term of such rules. Linguistics in this discipline
attempt to find general rules that apply
to all natural languages.
A transformational
grammar (TG) is a generative
grammar, especially of a natural language,
that has been developed in the syntactic
structures of phrase
structure grammars (as opposed to dependency
grammars).
Generative grammar is the rules determining
the structure and interpretation of sentences that speakers accept as belonging
to the language. A model of psychological system of unconscious knowledge that
underlies a speaker’s ability to produce and interpret utterances in a language.
Functional grammar is a model of grammar
motivated by funtions. Functional grammar is a model of grammar motivated by
funtions. The notion of function in FG generalizes the standard distinction of
grammatical functions such as subject and object. Constituent of a linguistic
utterance are assigned three tyoes or level of functions.
PREFERENCE
Chomsky, N. (1957
& 2002). Syntactic Structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmBH
Hawkins, R. (2001).
Second Language Syntax: A Generative Introduction. Massachusetts:
Blackwell Publishers
Sihombing, Sanggamn
Dkk. (2013). Syntax Theories. P.
Siantar
Kracht, Marcus.
(2000). Introduction to Linguistic.
Los Angeles: Departement of Linguistics UCLA
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar