Chapter 12
Theories of
Linguistics

Functionalism

Formalism
2
1. The functional perspective

The Prague School

The London School
3
1.1 The Prague School

Prague Linguistic Circle:

Started by V. Mathesius (1882-1946) in 1926, with
such activists as R. Jacobson (1896-1982), N.
Trubetzkoy (1890-1938) and later J. Firbas (19212000).

The Circle stood at the heart of important
developments in structural linguistics and
semiotics in the 1930's.
4

Three important points:
Stressed synchronic linguistics, but not rigidly
separated from diachronic studies.
 L is systemic in that no element of L can be
satisfactorily analysed or evaluated in isolation and
assessment can only be made if its relationship is
established with the coexisting elements in the
same language system.
 L is functional in that it is a tool for performing a
number of essential functions or tasks for the
community using it.

5
Prague School Phonology

N. Trubetzkoy: Principle of
Phonology (1939).
Phonetics & phonology: different
for parole & langue.
 Phoneme: an abstract unit of the
sound system.
 Distinctive features: phonological
oppositions.

6
Trubetzkoy’s contributions






Showed distinctive functions of speech sounds and
gave an accurate definition of the phoneme.
Defined the sphere of phonological studies.
Revealed interdependent syntagmatic and
paradigmatic relations between phonemes.
Put forward a set of methodologies for
phonological studies.
Analysis of utterances (or texts) in terms of the
information they contain.
The role of each utterance part is evaluated for its
semantic contribution to the whole.
7


A sentence contains a point of departure
and a goal of discourse. The point of
departure, called the theme, is the ground
on which the speaker and the hearer meet.
The goal of discourse, called the rheme,
presents the very information that is to be
imparted to the hearer.

Movement from theme to rheme reveals the
movement of the mind itself.
8


Therefore, the functional sentence perspective
(FSP) aims to describe how information is
distributed in sentences.
It deals particularly with the effect of the
distribution of known (given) info and new
info in discourse.
New info: to be transmitted to the reader or hearer.
 Sally
stands on the table.

Theme
Rheme
 On the table stands Sally.
Theme
Rheme
9
Three levels of a sentence




Grammatical Sentence Pattern (GSP)
Semantic Sentence Pattern (SSP)
Communicative Sentence Pattern (CSP)
John
Subject
Agent
Theme
has written
Verb
Action
Transition
a novel.
Object
Goal
Rheme
(GSP)
(SSP)
(CSP)
10
Communicative dynamism (CD)


J. Firbas
Linguistic communication is
dynamic, not static.

CD measures the amount of info an
element carries in a sentence. The
degree of CD is the effect
contributed by a linguistic element.
For example,
11

He was cross.

CD: The lowest degree
of CD is carried by he,
and the highest degree
of CD is carried by cross,
with the degree carried
by was ranking between
them.
12

Normally the subject carries a lower degree of
CD than the verb and/or the object and/or
adverbial provided either the verb or the object
and/or adverbial are contextually independent.

This is because a known or unknown agent
expressed by the subject appears to be
communicatively less important than an unknown
action expressed by the finite verb and/or an
unknown goal (object or adverbial of place) at or
towards which the action is directed.
13

For example,


A man broke into the house and
stole all the money.
The ultimate purpose of the
communication is to state the
action and/or its goal, not the
agent.
14

However, if the subject is followed by a verb
expressing “existence or appearance on the
scene” and is contextually independent,
then it will carry the highest degree of CD,
because an unknown person or thing
appearing on the scene is communicatively
more important than the act of appearing
and the scene itself, e.g.

An old man appeared in the waiting room at five
o’clock.
15

If the subject is contextually
dependent, a contextually
independent adverbial of
time or place becomes an
important local and temporal
specification, carrying
greater degree of CD than
both the subject and the
finite verb, as in

The old man was sitting in the
waiting room.
16
1.2 The London School



B. Malinowski (1884-1942),
professor of anthropology (1927).
J. R. Firth (1890-1960), the first
professor of linguistics in the UK
(1944).
M. A. K. Halliday (1925- ), student
of Firth.

All three stressed the importance of
context of situation and the system
aspect of L.
17
Malinowski’s theories


Language “is to be regarded as
a mode of action, rather than as
a counterpart of thought”.
The meaning of an utterance
comes from its relation to the
situational context in which it
occurs.
18

Three types of situational context:
situations in which speech interrelates with
bodily activity;
 narrative situations;
 situations in which speech is used to fill a
speech vacuum—phatic communion.

19
Firth’s theories

Regarded L as a social process,
a means of social life.
In order to live, human beings
have to learn and learning L is a
means of participation in social
activities.
 L is a means of doing things and
of making others do things, a
means of acting and living.

20




L is both inborn and acquired.
The object of linguistic study is L in use.
The goal of linguistic inquiry is to analyse
meaningful elements of L in order to establish
corresponding relations between linguistic and
non-linguistic elements.
The method of linguistic study is to decide on
the composite elements of L, explain their
relations on various levels, and ultimately
explicate the internal relations between these
elements and human activities in the
environment of language use.
21

Firth attempted to integrate linguistic
studies with sociological studies:


because human beings are inseparable from
cultural values, and L is an important part of
cultural values, linguistics can help reveal the
social nature of human beings.
Meaning is use, thus defining meaning as
the relationship between an element at any
level and its context on that level.
22

Therefore the meaning of any sentence
consists of five parts:
the relationship of each phoneme to its phonetic
context;
 the relationship of each lexical item to the others
in the sentence;
 the morphological relations of each word;
 the sentence type of which the given sentence is
an example;
 the relationship of the sentence to its context of
situation.

23


In analysing typical context of situation, one
has to carry out the analysis on four levels:
Internal relations of the text:
syntagmatic relations in structure
 paradigmatic relations in system


Internal relations of the context of situation:
relations between text and non-linguistic elements
 analytical relations between elements of the text
and elements within the situation

24


A model covering both the situational context
and the linguistic context of a text:
The relevant features of the participants:
persons, personalities
verbal action of participants
 non-verbal action of participants



The relevant topics, inc. objects, events, and
non-linguistic, non-human events.
The effects of the verbal action.
25

Prosodic analysis: prosodic phonology
Since any human utterance is continuous speech
flow made up of at least one syllable, it cannot be
cut into independent units. Mere phonetic and
phonological descriptions are insufficient.
 It is not phonemes that make up the paradigmatic
relations, but Phonematic Units, the features of
which are fewer than those of phonemes and are
called prosodic units.

26


He did not define prosodic units, but his
discussion indicates that they include such
features as stress, length, nasalisation,
palatalisation, and aspiration.
In any case, these features cannot be found
in one phonematic unit alone.
27
Systemic-functional grammar


M A K Halliday (1925- ).
Two components and
inseparable parts:
systemic grammar: internal
relations in L as a system
network, meaning potential.
 functional grammar: L as a
means of social interaction,
uses or functions of language
form.

28
Systemic grammar
finite…
clause
group
nonfinite…
nominal-group…
adjectival-adverbial-group…
prep-phrase…
word …
29
Functional grammar



Ideational function (experiential & logical):
to convey new info, communicate a content
unknown to the hearer
Interpersonal function: to express social and
personal relations
Textual function: to make any stretch of
spoken or written discourse into a coherent
and unified text and make a living passage
different from a random list of sentences.
30
31
2. Generative Grammar

NOAM CHOMSKY
(1928- ), institute
professor at MIT.
Linguist, philosopher,
and political activist.
32
















The Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory (1955/1975)
Syntactic Structures (1957)
Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (1965)
Cartesian Linguistics (1966)
The Sound Pattern of English (1968)
Language and Mind (1968/1972/2006)
Reflections on Language (1975)
Rules and Representations (1980)
Lectures on Government and Binding (1981)
Knowledge of Language (1986)
Barriers (1986)
Language and Problems of Knowledge (1988)
Language and Thought (1993)
The Minimalist Program (1995)
New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind (2000)
On Nature and Language (2002)
33
2.1 Early theories (1957)

Innateness hypothesis
Language acquisition mechanism
 Competence and performance


Transformations: generating an infinite set
of sentences from a finite set of elements
Deep structure and surface structure
 Phrase structure rules
 Transformations

34
Phrase structure rules





S  NP VP
VP  V NP
NP  Det N
V  act, beat, catch, dive, …
N  man, boy, book, flower, ...
35
36
Transformational rules




NP1 + Aux + V + NP2 
John + will + write + a story
NP2 + Aux + be + en + V + by + NP1
a story + will + be + en + write + by + John
37
2.2 The standard theory (1965)

Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
 Subcategorization
 N  [+N, Common]
 [+Common]  [Count]
 [+Count]  [Animate]
 [-Common]  [Animate]
 [+Animate]  [Human]
 [-Count]  [Abstract]

38

sincerity


[+N, +Common, -Count,
+Abstract]
boy

[+N, +Common, +Count,
+Animate, +Human]
39
40
2.3 Extended standard theory
41
42

Trace theory: a phonetically null element to
occupy the position from which a syntactic
element has been moved.
I really love Mary 
 Mary I really love t

43

Indexing:

Whoi said Mary kissed himi?

whoi [S ti said Mary kissed himi]

*Whoi did hei say Mary kissed?

*whoi [S hei said Mary kissed ti]

Johni said Mary kissed himi

*hei said Mary kissed Johni
44
45
46
2.4 GB/PP theory (1981)

Government and Binding Theory (early)

or

Principles and parameters Theory (later)
1980s

47
48
Principles







X-bar theory
Government theory
Binding theory
Case theory
-theory
Bounding theory
Control theory
49
Government


speak the language (speak governs the
language)
speak about the language (about governs
the language, speak governs about the
language)
50
C-command
51
52
Binding


The logical relation between a quantifier and
a variable.
Binding Theory:



A. An anaphor is bound in its governing category.
B. A pronominal is free in its governing category.
C. An r-expression is free.
53

Anaphora
‘oneself’ and ‘each other’
 John1 likes himself1.
 They1 hit each other1.
 John1 doesn’t like Bill’s2 criticism of himself2.
 John1 likes him2.
 Bill1 says John2 likes him1.
 Bill1 says John2 likes the man3.

54
Parameters



The null subject parameter
Head parameter
Wh-parameter
55
2.5 The Minimalist Program
56
Merge
(1) He has become very fond of Mary.
TP
PRN
He
T′
VP
T
has
AP
V
become
A′
ADV
very
PP
A
fond
P
of
N
Mary
57
Move
(2) You will marry me. (2a) Will you marry me?
CP
CP
C
Ø
C
Will+ Q
TP
PRN
you
PRN
you
T′
T
will
T′
T
will
VP
V
marry
TP
N
me
VP
N
me
V
marry
58
(3) I care not for her. (Shakespearean English)
CP
C
Ø
TP
PRN
I
T′
T
care
VP
V′
ADV
not
V
care
PP
P
for
PRN
me
59
(3a) Know you not the cause?
CP
TP
C
Know
PRN
you
(2)
T′
VP
T
know
ADV
not
(1)
V′
V
know
DP
the cause
60