consistent, i.e. to explore the nature, origin and the uses of human knowledge on language E. C: ase grammaR (格语法) 1)Case Grammar is a type of generative approach that stresses the relationship of elements in sentence. The grammar takes the verb as the most important part of the sentence, marking th relationships between the verb with various noun phrases as"cases 2)Fillmore's argument is based on the assumptions that syntax should be central in the determination of case and that covert categories are important The various ways in which cases occur in simple sentences define sentence types and verb types of a language 3)Case Grammar shows clear semantic relevance of notions such as agency, causation, location, advantage to someone, etc. These are easily identifiable across languages, and are held by many psychologists to play an important part in child language acquisition. For example (2)The student solved problems with a calculator in the classroom this morning 其中, solve为中心动词, student为施事格, problems为对象格, calculator为工具格, 为场所格, morning为时间格 F. Tagmemics(法位学) For Kenneth Pike, all languages have three interrelated hierarchies: phonological grammatical, and referential. On each level of the three hierarchies, there are four linguistic units having the four following features: Slot, Class, Role, and Cohesion. Their definitions and the relation formula(diagram) can be seen on the page of 323. Each of the four components in the diagram is called a cell. Some tagmemes are obligatory and are marked by"+, while optional tagmemes are marked by The ultimate aim of tagmemics is to provide a theory which integrates lexical, grammatical, and phonological information G. Stratificational Grammar(层次语法) 1. Sydney McDonald Lamb developed his theory in a model consisting of three levels, or STRATA: phoneme, morpheme, and MORPHOPHONEME. This laid the foundation for his stratificational grammar 2. Lamb regards language not in term of the elements that comprise it but rather as a system of relationships. He says that linguistic analysis can perhaps best be understood as a process of simplifying. It is a process that involves both simplification and generalization 3. Lamb claims that language, by its nature, relates sound to meaning, and vice versa, and while the relationship is complex it can be seen as series of connected stratal systems or strata. Among various strata, the four principal ones are the sememic, lexemic, morphemic, and the phonemic, from top to bottom. And every item of each stratum is composed of smaller"-on"units semon,“ lexon”," morphon”, and"phonon 4. For Stratificational Grammar, the various relations in a language are realized by three patterns in the relational network: the alternation pattern, the tactic pattern, and the sign pattern 5. Stratificational analysis seems to give a better account of the relations between sound and meaning. Lamb's theory aims to know about the language system in the human mind. Thus, he named his theory as COGNITIVE STRATIFICATIONAL THEORY. Later on, Lamb distinguished his theory with term NEUROCOGNITIVE LINGUISTICS H. Generative semantics(生成语义学) 1. Generative Semantics was developed as a reaction to Chomskys syntactic-based TG ammar. This theory considers that all sentences are generated from a semantic structure Linguists working within this theory hold that there is no principled distinction between syntactic
6 consistent, i.e. to explore the nature, origin and the uses of human knowledge on language. E. Case grammar（格语法） 1) Case Grammar is a type of generative approach that stresses the relationship of elements in a sentence. The grammar takes the verb as the most important part of the sentence, marking the relationships between the verb with various noun phrases as “cases”. 2) Fillmore’s argument is based on the assumptions that syntax should be central in the determination of case and that covert categories are important. The various ways in which cases occur in simple sentences define sentence types and verb types of a language. 3) Case Grammar shows clear semantic relevance of notions such as agency, causation, location, advantage to someone, etc. These are easily identifiable across languages, and are held by many psychologists to play an important part in child language acquisition.For example: (2)The student solved problems with a calculator in the classroom this morning. 其中，solve 为中心动词，student 为施事格，problems 为对象格，calculator 为工具格， classroom 为场所格，morning 为时间格。 F. Tagmemics（法位学） For Kenneth Pike, all languages have three interrelated hierarchies: phonological, grammatical, and referential. On each level of the three hierarchies, there are four linguistic units having the four following features: Slot, Class, Role, and Cohesion. Their definitions and the relation formula (diagram) can be seen on the page of 323. Each of the four components in the diagram is called a cell. Some tagmemes are obligatory and are marked by “+”, while optional tagmemes are marked by “－”.The ultimate aim of tagmemics is to provide a theory which integrates lexical, grammatical, and phonological information. G. Stratificational Grammar (层次语法) 1. Sydney McDonald Lamb developed his theory in a model consisting of three levels, or STRATA: phoneme, morpheme, and MORPHOPHONEME. This laid the foundation for his stratificational grammar. 2. Lamb regards language not in term of the elements that comprise it but rather as a system of relationships. He says that linguistic analysis can perhaps best be understood as a process of simplifying. It is a process that involves both simplification and generalization. 3. Lamb claims that language, by its nature, relates sound to meaning, and vice versa, and while the relationship is complex it can be seen as series of connected stratal systems or strata. Among various strata, the four principal ones are the sememic, lexemic, morphemic, and the phonemic, from top to bottom. And every item of each stratum is composed of smaller “-on” units: “semon”, “lexon”, “morphon”, and “phonon”. 4. For Stratificational Grammar, the various relations in a language are realized by three patterns in the relational network: the alternation pattern, the tactic pattern, and the sign pattern. 5. Stratificational analysis seems to give a better account of the relations between sound and meaning. Lamb’s theory aims to know about the language system in the human mind. Thus, he named his theory as COGNITIVE STRATIFICATIONAL THEORY. Later on, Lamb distinguished his theory with term NEUROCOGNITIVE LINGUISTICS. H. Generative semantics (生成语义学) 1. Generative Semantics was developed as a reaction to Chomsky’s syntactic-based TG Grammar. This theory considers that all sentences are generated from a semantic structure. Linguists working within this theory hold that there is no principled distinction between syntactic
processes and semantic processes. This notion was accompanied by a number of subsidiary hypotheses. (I The purely syntactic level of deep structure posited by Chomsky's Aspects of the Theory of Syntax(1965)cannot exist. @2 The initial representations of derivations are logical representations identical from language to language. 3 All aspects of meaning are representable arker form. In other words. the derivation of a sentence is a direct transf mapping from semantics to surface structure. 2. While Generative Semantics is no longer regarded as a viable grammatical model, it is important in a number of ways. (1 It was generative semanticists that started an intensive investigation of syntactic phenomena which defied formalization by means of transformational rules.@2 Many proposals originally disputed by generative semanticists have since appea the interpretivist literature. The important initial studies which Generative Semantics inspired on various topics are becoming more and more appreciated L Montague grammar(蒙太古语法 Montague grammar is an approach to natural language semantics, named after American logician Richard Montague. The Montague grammar is based on formal logic, especially higher order predicate logic and lambda calculus, and makes use of the notions of intensional logic, via Kripke models. Montague pioneered this approach in the 1960s and early 1970s Montague's thesis was that natural languages(like English) and formal languages (like programming languages) can be treated in the same way: There is in my opinion no important theoretical difference between natural languages and the artificial languages of logicians: indeed, I consider it possible to comprehend the syntax and sem antics of both kinds of language within a single natural and mathematically precise theory. On this point I differ from a number of philosophers, but agree, I believe, with Chomsky and his associates. (Universal Grammar 1970) J. Generalized Phrase structure grammar(广义短语结构语法) Generalized phrase structure grammar(GPSG) is a framework for describing the syntax and semantics of natural languages. It is a type of phrase structure grammar, as opposed to a dependency grammar. GPSG was initially developed in the late 1970s by Gerald Gazdar. Other contributors include, Ivan Sag, and Geoffrey Pullum. Their book Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, published in 1985, is the main monograph on GPSG, especially as it applies to English syntax One of the chief goals of GPSG is to show that the syntax of natural languages can be described by context-free grammars(written as ID/LP grammars), with some suitable conventions intended to make writing such grammars easier for syntacticians. Among these conventions are a sophisticated feature structure sy stem and so-called"meta-rules", which are rules generating the reductions of a context-free grammar. GPSG further augments syntactic descriptions with semantic annotations that can be used to compute the compositional meaning of a sentence from its syntactic derivation tree. However, it has been argued(for example by) that these extensions require parsing algorithms of a higher order of computational complexity than those used for basic CFGs. Gerald Gazdar, and many other syntacticians, have since argued that natural languages cannot in fact be adequately described by CFGs gPsg is in part a reaction against transformational theories of syntax. In fact, the notational extensions to context-free grammars developed in GPSG are claimed to make transformations redundant. Most of the syntactic innovations of GPSG were subsequently incorporated into head-driven phrase structure grammar K.Head- driven phrase structure grammar(中心语驱动短语结构语法)
7 processes and semantic processes. This notion was accompanied by a number of subsidiary hypotheses. ① The purely syntactic level of deep structure posited by Chomsky’s Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (1965) cannot exist. ② The initial representations of derivations are logical representations identical from language to language. ③ All aspects of meaning are representable in phrase-marker form. In other words, the derivation of a sentence is a direct transformational mapping from semantics to surface structure. 2. While Generative Semantics is no longer regarded as a viable grammatical model, it is important in a number of ways. ① It was generative semanticists that started an intensive investigation of syntactic phenomena which defied formalization by means of transformational rules. ② Many proposals originally disputed by generative semanticists have since appeared in the interpretivist literature. ③ The important initial studies which Generative Semantics inspired on various topics are becoming more and more appreciated. I. Montague Grammar（蒙太古语法） Montague grammar is an approach to natural language semantics, named after American logician Richard Montague. The Montague grammar is based on formal logic, especially higher order predicate logic and lambda calculus, and makes use of the notions of intensional logic, via Kripke models. Montague pioneered this approach in the 1960s and early 1970s. Montague's thesis was that natural languages (like English) and formal languages (like programming languages) can be treated in the same way:There is in my opinion no important theoretical difference between natural languages and the artificial languages of logicians; indeed, I consider it possible to comprehend the syntax and semantics of both kinds of language within a single natural and mathematically precise theory. On this point I differ from a number of philosophers, but agree, I believe, with Chomsky and his associates. (Universal Grammar 1970) J. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar（广义短语结构语法） Generalized phrase structure grammar (GPSG) is a framework for describing the syntax and semantics of natural languages. It is a type of phrase structure grammar, as opposed to a dependency grammar. GPSG was initially developed in the late 1970s by Gerald Gazdar. Other contributors include, Ivan Sag, and Geoffrey Pullum. Their book Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, published in 1985, is the main monograph on GPSG, especially as it applies to English syntax. One of the chief goals of GPSG is to show that the syntax of natural languages can be described by context-free grammars (written as ID/LP grammars), with some suitable conventions intended to make writing such grammars easier for syntacticians. Among these conventions are a sophisticated feature structure system and so-called "meta-rules", which are rules generating the productions of a context-free grammar. GPSG further augments syntactic descriptions with semantic annotations that can be used to compute the compositional meaning of a sentence from its syntactic derivation tree. However, it has been argued (for example by) that these extensions require parsing algorithms of a higher order of computational complexity than those used for basic CFGs. Gerald Gazdar, and many other syntacticians, have since argued that natural languages cannot in fact be adequately described by CFGs.GPSG is in part a reaction against transformational theories of syntax. In fact, the notational extensions to context-free grammars developed in GPSG are claimed to make transformations redundant. Most of the syntactic innovations of GPSG were subsequently incorporated into head-driven phrase structure grammar. K. Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar（中心语驱动短语结构语法）