UDC 811. 111’364                                                                       

               Vynnychenko, L.

Reznik, N.

Kamianets-Podilsky Ivan Ohienko National University

Scientific supervisor: Umanets, A.V.

GENERATIVE TRENDS IN MODERN AMERICAN DESCRIPTIVE LINGUISTICS

In recent years linguists have become increasingly interested in generative linguistics. It is widely accepted that generative trends in linguistics grew out of American Descriptivism that incorporated the development of structural approach to the language. Modern American descriptivism is commonly associated with three linguistic schools: Yale, Ann Arbor, Chomskyam. L. Bloomfield [1; 8, 127] in terms of Yale school [3] (cf. G. Trager, B. Bloch, Z. Harris) provided an introlinguistic formal analysis and ignored semantic criteria in linguistic studies. In contrast to introlinguistic approach of Yale school, E. Sapir [5; 7, 137] in terms of Ann Arbor school (cf. K. Pike, E. Nida, and C. Fries) applied an extralinguistic background to experimental studies of the Indian language. However, the influence of Bloomfieldian and Sapirian approaches to linguistics declined in the late 1950s and 1960s, as the theory of Transformational Grammar developed by N. Chomsky [2] in "Syntactic Structures” in 1957 came to predominate.

In particular, the Chomskyan generative branch of linguistics and its various interpretations have been carried over to represent different trends of its development in terms of American Descriptive linguistics. Consequently, the development of generative linguistics tends to be problematic, as it combines several opposing theories. It is appropriate to focus on various stages in the development of the theoretical framework. A considerable amount of research has been devoted to the investigation of the theoretical background of generative linguistics; few attempts have been made to analyze the refining of different notions and piecing them together into what they saw as new trends of linguistics. Thus, the primary objective of the paper is to envisage the main trends of American generative linguistics.

The Standard theory (ST) [9] (1957–1965) laid out in Chomsky's works was immediately subjected to intensive criticism and evaluation. The main difference between 1957 and 1965 versions is the addition of the semantic component, suggested by J. Katz and J. Fodor, then by J. Katz and P. Postal, and the explicit introduction of the concepts of deep and surface structures. As the clear-cut distinction between optional and obligatory transformations becomes vague, the difference between kernel structures and transforms practically fades away. Rather, transformation markers will determine types of transformations. Instead of the morphophonemic rules later interpretations contained non-phonological component; phrase structure rules were extended into bare rules, which were divided into phrase structure rewriting rules and a lexicon. Transformational rules remained unchanged. And as for the semantic component, it had no counterparts.

The Extended standard theory (EST) [9] was formulated between 1965–1973. The main subjects of the theory are syntactic constraints, generalized phrase structures ("X-bar theory”). The problem was that model of Transformational grammar that linguists were using did not have intermediate categories which are larger than a word but smaller than a phrase. The deficiency in the earlier model of Transformational grammar was remedied by the creation of "X-Bar Syntax” or "X-Bar Theory”. The aim of the generative X-bar theory was to capture crosscategorial generalizations without using transformations. X-bar theory was further elaborated by J. Emonds and R. Jackendoff. Later developments concern the generalization to functional structure (N. Chomsky) [4], the binary branching format, the antisymmetry hypothesis, and the related universal base hypothesis (R. Kayne).

Further revisions and technical innovations such as introduction of "empty categories”, "X-bar theory”, "D- and S-structures”, and conditions on representations such as "Case filter” led to the Revised extended standard theory [9], in which the grammatical model was greatly simplified.

The minimalist program (MP) [6] is a very vital stage of the theory of Generative Grammar. Its main goal is to derive all conditions on derivations and representations from the so-called "bare output conditions”, i.e. from conditions on the representations that constitute the interfaces of the grammatical component with other components of the cognitive system. In this respect, it is properly characterized as a logical consequence of earlier stages of the theory arrived at by way of sharpening some notions that were relevant in the earlier stages, and by eliminating certain notions that turned out to be redundant in the process. Thus, the exploration of minimalist questions has led to radical changes in the technical apparatus of generative theory: the generalization of "X-bar theory” into "Bare Phrase Structure”; the simplification of representational levels in the grammatical model, eliminating the distinction between deep structure and surface structure in favor of more explicitly derivational approach; the elimination of the notion of government;  introducing a single point of interaction between syntax and the interfaces; the idea that syntactic derivations proceed by clearly delineated stages.

To conclude, the development of Generative linguistics is concerned mainly with 5 trends: ST, SET, REST, GB/ PP, MP that represent formal and analytic methodology of American Descriptivism. This historiography demonstrates that the Descriptivists came to focus increasingly on the techniques and devices that they employed to construct new linguistic analyses. Although, the Descriptivists were also prescient in understanding the need to justify the choice of analytic devices, the need to provide external validation for synchronic descriptions, and in recognizing the usefulness of statistical, information-theoretic and corpus-based methods of analysis.

Abstract:

The paper provides a data-motivated, step-by-step analysis of the generative trends in modern American descriptivism. The treatment of the opposing theories and gradual refining of the main notions in terms of generative linguistics have been undertaken. Generative trends mark the advent of a recognizably modern approach in linguistics, the one in which formal tools and analytic methods are primary objectives of our study.

References

1. Bloomfield L. Language / Leonard Bloomfield. — Chicago : Chicago University Press, 1984. — 564 p.

2. Chomsky N. Syntactic structures / Avram Noam Chomsky. — The Hague / Paris: Mouton, 1957. — 117 p.

3. Newmeyer F. J. Generative Linguistics: A Historical Perspective / Frederick J. Newmeyer. — Routledge. New ed., 1997. — 232 p.

4. Rojo A. Step by Step (Contemporary Studies in Descriptive Linguistics) / Ana Rojo. — Peter Lang. 1 ed., 2009. — 418 p.

5.   Sapir E. Language. An Introduction to the Study of Speech [Електронний ресурс] / Edward Sapir. — Режим доступу :http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/12629.

6. Алпатов В. М. История лингвистичесних учений : [учебное пособие] / Владимир Михайлович Алпатов — [4-е изд., исправ. и доп.]. — М. : Языки славянской культуры, 2005. — 368 с.

7.   Кронгауз М. А. Семантический и прагматический аспект // Сокровенные смыслы : Слово. Текст. Культура : Сб. статей в честь Н.Д. Арутюновой / Отв. ред. Ю.Д. Апресян. — М. : Языки славянской культуры, 2004. — С. 137-141.

8. Селиванова Е.А. Основы лингвистической теории текста и коммуникации : Монографическое учебное пособие. — Киев : Брама, Изд. Вовчок О. Ю. 2004. — 336 с.

9. Современная американская лингвистика  : Фундаментальные направления / под ред. А. А. Кибрика, И. М. Кобзевой, И. А. Секериной. — [2-е изд., исправ. и доп.]. — М. : Едиториал УРСС, 2002. — 480 с.