Skip to main content
Shopping cart: items Cart

Arguments for a Non-Transformational Grammar

For the past decade, the dominant transformational theory of syntax has produced the most interesting insights into syntactic properties. Over the same period another theory, systemic grammar, has been developed very quietly as an alternative to the transformational model. In this work Richard A. Hudson outlines "daughter-dependency theory," which is derived from systemic grammar, and offers empirical reasons for preferring it to any version of transformational grammar.

The goal of daughter-dependency theory is the same as that of Chomskyan transformational grammar—to generate syntactic structures for all (and only) syntactically well-formed sentences that would relate to both the phonological and the semantic structures of the sentences. However, unlike transformational grammars, those based on daughter-dependency theory generate a single syntactic structure for each sentence. This structure incorporates all the kinds of information that are spread, in a transformational grammar, over to a series of structures (deep, surface, and intermediate). Instead of the combination of phrase-structure rules and transformations found in transformational grammars, daughter-dependency grammars contain rules with the following functions: classification, dependency-marking, or ordering.

Hudson’s strong arguments for a non-transformational grammar stress the capacity of daughter-dependency theory to reflect the facts of language structure and to capture generalizations that transformational models miss. An important attraction of Hudson’s theory is that the syntax is more concrete, with no abstract underlying elements.

In the appendixes, the author outlines a partial grammar for English and a small lexicon and distinguishes his theory from standard dependency theory. Hudson’s provocative thesis is supported by his thorough knowledge of transformational grammar.

224 pages | 5.25 x 8.00 | © 1976

Language and Linguistics: Syntax and Semantics

Table of Contents

Preface
1. Introduction
1.1. Transformational Grammar and Daughter-dependency Grammar
1.2. A First Sketch of Daughter-dependency Syntax
1.2.1. Levels of Language
1.2.2. Rules, Conditions, and Processes
1.2.3. What a Daughter-dependency Grammar Generates
1.2.4. How a Daughter-dependency Grammar Generates
1.3. Some Attractions of Daughter-dependency Grammar
 
2. Classification Rules
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Constraints on Classification by Features
2.3. Classification of Sentences and Phrases
2.4. Classification of Words
3. Structure-building Rules
3.1. A General Overview
3.2. Daughter-dependency Rules
3.3. Sister-dependency Rules
3.4. Feature-addition Rules
3.5. Peripherality-assignment Rules
3.6. Function-assignment Rules
3.7. Sequence Rules
3.8. Raising and Discontinuity
3.9. Understood Elements
 
4. Auxiliary Verbs
4.1. The Chomsky Analysis
4.2. The Ross Analysis
4.3. The Daughter-dependency Analysis of Auxiliaries
4.4. Passives
4.5. ’Dummy’ Auxiliaries: Do and Shall
4.6. Extending the Analysis
 
5. Conclusions and Implications
 
Appendix One: A Partial Grammar for English
Appendix Two: Daughter-dependency Grammar and Standard ’Dependency Theory’
References
Index

Be the first to know

Get the latest updates on new releases, special offers, and media highlights when you subscribe to our email lists!

Sign up here for updates about the Press