新语言学流派 9页

Chapter12TheoriesandSchoolsofModernLinguistics12.1SaussureandStructuralism12.1.1FerdinanddeSaussure12.1.2Saussure’sLinguisticConcepts12.1.3Structuralism12.2ThePragueSchool12.2.1PhonologicalContribution12.2.2SyntacticContribution—FunctionalSentencePerspective12.3TheLondonSchool12.3.1Firth12.3.2Halliday’sSystemicFunctionalGrammar(SFG)12.4AmericanStructuralism12.4.1Bloomfield12.4.2Sapir12.5Transformational–GenerativeGrammar12.5.1Chomsky’sSyntacticStructure12.5.2Chomsky’sInnatenessHypothesis12.5.3Chomsky’sCompetencevs.Performance12.5.4StructuralLinguisticsandT-GGrammar12.1SaussureandStructuralism12.1.1FerdinanddeSaussureFerdinanddeSaussure(1857-1913),aSwisslinguistandSanskritist,excelledearlyinIndo-Europeanphilology.Afterhisdeath,twoofhisstudents,C.BallyandA.Sechehaye,basedonthestudents’lecturenotesandsomeofhisownjottings,compiledAcourseinGeneralLinguisticsin1916.Saussureiswidelyconsideredtobethefounderofmodernlinguisticsinitsattemptstodescribethestructureoflanguageratherthanthehistoryofparticularlanguagesandlanguageforms.Heisalsothelinguistfounderofstructuralism.Saussurepointedoutthatlanguageisnotcomposedofindividualunits,eachinherentwithmeaning,butasystemofphoneticandsemanticdifferences.Forexample,theword“bed”iswhatisnotmeantbythewords“bad”,“bid”,“bud”,“fed”,etc..12.1.2Saussure’sLinguisticConcepts1.LinguisticSign—Signifiervs.SignifiedSignSignifierSignifiedconceptsoundimageLanguageisbasedonaNAMINGprocess,bywhichthingsgetassociatedwithawordorname.Saussuresaysthisisaprettynaïveorelementaryviewoflanguage,becauseitgetsacrosstheideathatthebasiclinguisticunithastwoparts.Saussurenamesthosetwopartstheconceptandthesoundimage.Thelinguisticsignismadeoftheunionofaconceptandasoundimage.Saussureisverycarefultoemphasizethatwordsdonotrefertothingsintherealworldbuttoideasweincludeabouttheworld.Forexample,theword“tree”doesnotrefertothethingintheworldbutrathertoaconceptinourminds.Oneusesdeicticmarkerslike“this”or“that”torelateconceptstoobjectsintheworld.9\nAccordingtoSaussure,alinguisticsignisthecombinationofasignifierandasignified,thesoundimagebeingthesignifierandtheconceptbeingthesignified.2.LangueVSParoleLanguageLangueParolecollectiveabstractsystemsharedbyacommunityactualspeechmadebyanindividualSaussuretalksaboutthesystemoflanguageasawholeaslangue(fromtheFrenchwordforlanguage),andanyindividualunitwithinthatsystemasaparole.Paroleisanindividualrealizationoflangue.StructurallinguisticsismoreinterestedintheLANGUEthaninanyparole.3.SynchronicVSDiachronicPanchronicSynchronicDiachronicstudyofasystemasitexistsatonemomentintimestudyofasystemoveraspecificextentoftimeAdiachronicapproachinvolvesanexaminationoforigins,development,historyandchange.Forexample,wemayexaminetheetymologyofawordorthedevelopmentofagenre.Diachronicapproachesgiveusahistoryandfocusonhowthingschangeovertime.Saussurefocusesonasynchronicanalysisoflanguageasasystemorstructure,thatis,heexaminesitonlyatoneparticularmomentintime,withoutregardtowhatitspasthistoryis,orwhatitsfuturemaybe.Forexample,wemightnotehowawordisdistinguishedfromotherwordsatthemoment.Synchronicapproachesfocusonhowagivensystemisatagivenmomentandhoweachpartfitsintothesystem.4.SyntagmaticVSAssociativeSignrelationSyntagmatic(linear)(Paradigmatic)associativesubstitutionpositioningAccordingtoSaussure,meaningarisesfromthedifferencesbetweensignifiers;thesedifferencesareoftwokinds:syntagmaticandassociative(nowreferredtoasparadigmatic).Thesetwodimensionsareoftenpresentedas“axes”,wherethehorizontalaxisisthesyntagmaticandtheverticalaxisistheparadigmatic.ranmancametheboywrotesyntagmaticxis9\nFromthechart,wecouldseethatthesyntagmaticrelationsarepossibilitiesofcombination;whileparadigamatic/associativerelationsarepossibilitiesofselection.Syntagmaticrelationsareaproductoflinguisticstructure;whileparadigmaticrelationsareonlychoicesinyourhead.12.1.3StructuralismStructuralistsareinterestedintheinterrelationshipbetweenUNITS,alsocalled“surfacephenomena”,and“RULES”,whicharethewaysthatunitscanbeputtogether.Inlanguage,forinstance,theunitsarewords(orthephonemeswhichmakeallthesoundsofwordsinEnglish)andtherulesaretheformsofgrammarwhichorderwords.Indifferentlanguagesthegrammarrulesardifferent,asthewords,butthestructureisstillthesameinalllanguages—wordsareputtogetherwithinagrammaticalsystemtomakemeaning.Structurallinguistsopposethestudyoflanguageasanisolatedphenomenonandsuggestinvestigatinglanguageinasystematicway.Threeschoolsofstructuralismthathavecomeintoformationare:thePragueSchool,theLondonSchoolandAmericanStructuralism.Theyaredistinctfromeachotherincertainattitudesandtheories.Thefollowingtableshowstheirfocusrespectively.StructuralismFocusThePragueSchoolthefunctionoflinguisticstructuresTheLondonSchooltherelationshipamonglinguisticstructuresAmericanSchoolthedescriptionandanalysisoftheformoflinguisticstructuresHowever,thethreeschoolsofstructuralismsdosharesomecommonalitiesamongthem:theyhaveallacceptedsomeofSaussure’sbasictheories,suchasthedistinctionbetweenlangueandparole,betweensynchronicanddiachronic,andtheviewoflanguageassystem,etc.,andtheyanalyzelinguisticcomponentsbyseparatingthemfromtheirdiscourse.Structuralismhasprofoundlyinfluencedotherdisciplines,especiallyanthropology,sociologyandliterarycriticism.12.2ThePragueSchoolThePragueSchoolreferstothelinguistswhoattendthePragueLinguisticCircle(PLC)sincethelate1920s,andthosewhoarecloselyrelatedtothisCircleinideasandopinionsinthenarrowsense.InthebroadsenseitreferstolinguistsandscholarswhofollowthetraditionofthePragueSchool.PraguestructuralismisfunctionalisticinthatthePragueSchoolviewslanguageasacombinationofstructureandfunction.Solanguageisastructuralsystemofmultifunction,whichcomprisesmanyinterdependentsub-systems.TheyarealsofamousforthephonologicalstudyoflanguageandanalysisoflanguagefromFunctionalSentencePerspective(FSP),whichenablethemtoplaytheleadingroleinthefieldofstructurallinguistics.12.2.1PhonologicalContributionTrubetzkoy’sPhonologicalOppositionsFocusoflinguisticstudySpokenlanguageWrittenlanguageBeforeSaussure,writtentextsweretheonlyfocusoflinguisticstudy.AccordingtoSaussure,writtentextscannotprovideafullpictureoflanguage;somelanguageswhichhavenowrittenformsalsodeserverecognitionandstudy.SothefocusonspokenlanguageleadstothemajorcontributiontophonologymadebythePragueSchool,especiallyTrubetzkoy(1890-1938)withhisPrinciplesofPhonology(1939).ThePragueSchoollinguistsarguethatphonologybelongstolanguewhilephoneticsbelongstoparole.Theydevelopedtheconcept“phoneme”onthebasisoftheabovedistinctionandconsideredphonemeasanabstractunitofsoundsystemdistinctfromtheactualsound.Aswehavediscussedinthepreviouschapterofphonology,aphonemehasthreedefining9\nfeatures:1)ithasdiscriminativepower;2)itcannotbeanalyzedintosmallerdistinctivesegment;3)itcanonlybedeterminedbydistinctivefeatures.Trubetzkoyidentifiedninephonologicaloppositionsfollowingthecriteriaoftheirrelationtothewholecontrastivesystem;relationsbetweentheopposingelements;andtheirpowerofdiscrimination.Andtheninephonologicaloppositionsare:lBilateralopposition(双边对立)Referstoapairofsoundsthatshareasetoffeatureswhichnoothersoundsharesfully.Forexample,/p,b/areoral,bilabial,plosivesandnoothersoundsharethesefeatures,sotheyarebilabialopposition.lMultilateralopposition(多边对立)Referstoagroupofmorethantwosoundswhichsharecommonfeatures.Forexample,/p,f/arelabiallabio-dentalbuttherearealsoothersoundssuchas/b,v/sharingthesetwofeatures,sotheyaremultilateralopposition.lProportionalopposition(均衡对立)Referstotheopposition(distribution)betweenapairwhichisthesameastheoppositionbetweenoneormoreotherpairsofsounds.Forexample,/p/isto/b/as/t/isto/d/or/k/isto/g/,thatis,thedifferencebetweeneachpairisrelatedtoonefeature—voicing.Thereforetheproportionsp:b=t:d=k:g.lIsolatedopposition(孤立对立)Referstotheopposition(distribution)ofaparticularpairwhichisnotsharedbyanyotherpairs.Forexample,theoppositionbetween/l/and/r/inEnglishisnotsharedbyanyotherpairofphonemesinEnglish.lPrivativeopposition（否定对立）Referstotheoppositionthatonememberofapairpossessesamarkorfeature,whichtheotherlacks.Suchfeaturesarealsoknownasbinaryfeatureswhichasoundeitherpossessesorlacks.Forexample,voicingandnasalityaresuchfeatures.AsoundisvoicedorNOTvoiced;nasalorNOTnasal.Thesoundwhichpossessesthatfeatureissaidtobemarked(e.g.[+voice],[+nasal]);whilethesoundlackingthefeatureisunmarked(e.g.[-voice],[-nasal]).lGradualopposition(分级对立)Referstotheoppositionbetweenthemembersofagroupsoundswhichpossessdifferentdegreesorgradationsofafeatureorproperty.Forexample,therearethreeshortfrontunroundedvowelsinEnglishwhicharedistinguishedbytheirheight,/,e,/.Inthissystem//and/e/,canbesaidtobeingradualopposition.lEquipollentopposition(等价对立)Referstotheoppositionbetweenapairthatisconsideredtobelogicallyequivalent.Thatis,thedifferencebetweenthemisneitheraprivativenoragradualopposition.Theplacesofarticulationforconsonantscanbeseeninthissense.Changesinplaceinvolvenotjustthedegreeoffrontingbutalsootherarticulatorchanges.Forexample,[bilabial]involvestwolips,[labiodental]involvesthelowerlipandupperteeth,[dental]involvesthetonguetipandtheteeth,[alveolar]involvesthetonguetipandthealveolarridge,[velar]involvesthetonguebodyandthesoftpalate.So/p/and/t/areequipollentopposition.lNeutralisableopposition(抵消对立)Referstotheoppositionbetweenapairthatcanoccurinalpositionswithoutneutralizingeffect.Forexample,inEnglish,/p/and/b/areneutralizedatthebeginningofasyllablefollowing/s/.Theallophonesof/p/in/spn/isusuallyidenticaltotheallophoneof/b/inawordsuchas/bn/.lConstantopposition(永恒对立)Referstotheoppositionbetweenapairthatcanoccurinallpositionswithoutneutralizingeffect.Forexample,inEnglish,/m/and/n/canoccurinallofthesamepositions:snow/smoke,night/might,hone/home,etc..12.2.2SyntacticContribution—FunctionalSentencePerspectiveThePragueSchoolbelievesthatlinguistictheoryshouldgobeyondthemeredescriptionoflinguisticstructuretoexplainthefunctionsfulfilledbylinguisticforms.Soasatheoryoflinguisticanalysis,FunctionalSentencePerspective(FSP)referstoanalyzingutterances9\n(sentences)fromafunctionalpointofviewintermsoftheinformationtheycontain.Itexamineshowlanguagefunctionsintheactofcommunication.AccordingtoPraguelinguists,asentencecontainsapointofdepartureandagoalofdiscourse.Thepointofdepartureisequallypresenttothespeakerandhearer—itisthegroundonwhichtheymeet.Thisiscalledthetheme.Thegoalofdiscoursepresentstheveryinformationthatistobeimpartedtothehearer.Thisiscalledtherheme.Theybelievethatthemovementfromthethemetotherhemerevealsthemovementofminditself.FSPfurtherdistinguishestheinformationincludedwithinadiscourseintoknown/giveninformation(informationsharedbythereader/thehearer).Sothemeusuallycorrespondstowhatisknown/given,andrhemeunknown/new.Letuscompare:Themapisonpagefive.Onpagefiveisthemap.SubjectPredicatePredicateSubjectThemeRhemeThemeRhemeKnownNewKnownNew12.3TheLondonSchoolTheLondonSchoolisaveryimportantschoolofmodernlinguistics.JohnRupertFirth(1890-1960)istheoriginator,andhisstudentM.A.K.Halliday(1925-?)hasmadegreatcontributiontothedevelopmentofitstheories.TheschooloflinguisticsFirthrepresentediscalledtheLondonSchoolbecausehewascloselyrelatedtotheUniversityofLondon.Thelinguistsemphasizedtheimportanceofcontextofsituationandthesystemaspectoflanguage.Therefore,theLondonSchoolisalsocalled“systemiclinguistics”and“functionallinguistics”.12.3.1FirthJ.R.FirthisthefounderoftheLondonSchoolandagreatlinguistinEngland,andhewasthecentralfigureofEnglishlinguisticsfrom1940sto1960s.Hisacademicworksandcontributionconcernedmainlyphonologyandsemantics.1.Firth’sProsodyProsodicphonologywasregardedasthemostdistinctiveaspectofFirth’slinguisticwork,anditmadeaveryradicalbreakwithphonologicaltheory.ForFirth,thephonemeasatheoreticalunithaditsvalueinthedevisingandjustifyingofeconomicalbroadtranscriptions.InthetheoryofphonologyproposedbyFirth,thenotionofprosodyisgivenspecialstatus.Prosodiesarefeaturesextendingoverstretchesofutterance.Itincludesnotonlypitch,stress,toneandrhythmbutalsoliproundingornasalization,whentheseareusedtoaccountforphonologicalrestrictions,ortocharacterizegrammaticalstructure.2.Firth’sContextAstosemantics,Firthheldthatmeaningisfunctionincontext.Whathereferredtoasmeaningisnotconfinedtogrammaticalorlexicalmeaning,butincludesmeaningincontext.Heemphasizesthatoneshouldconductcontextualanalysisonfourlevels.Thefirstlevelisphonologicalanalysisthatwillrevealthephonologicalfunctions.Thesecondlevelislexicalandsemanticanalysesthatseektoexplainthereferentialmeaningandthecollocativemeaning.Thethirdlevelisgrammaticalanalysisthatinvolvesmorphologicalandsyntacticanalysis.Thefourthlevelistheanalysisofthecontextofsituationwherenon-linguisticelementsareanalyzed.3.Firth’sSystemVS.StructureDrawingonSaussure’sdimensionsofsyntagmaticandparadigmaticunits,Firthusedstructureandsystemtorefertothesetwodimensionsoftheintralinguisticrelationship:systemisthetheoreticalrepresentationofparadigmaticrelations,contrastedwithstructureforsyntagmaticrelations,asshowninthefollowingfigure.sysstructureem9\n12.3.2Halliday’sSystemicFunctionalGrammar(SFG)Hallidayisthefounderofsystemicfunctionallinguistics.FollowingFirth,thefounderoftheLondonSchool,hebecametherepresentativeoftheLondonSchoolin1960s.HallidaybuilthislinguistictheoryupontwoconceptionsofFirth,oneistheconceptofsystem,theotheriscontextofsituation.From“system”derivedthesyntacticanalysisintheLondonstyle—systemicgrammar.InFirth’ssystem-structuretheory,neitheroftheseisgivenpriority.Insystemictheorythesystemtakespriority:themostabstractrepresentationatanylevelisinparadigmaticterms.Syntagmaticorganizationisinterpretedastherealizationofparadigmaticfeatures.1.SystemFirth’sfirstconceptionofsystemwasfurtherdevelopedbyHallidayinhisgrammaticalsystems.Halliday’sgrammaticalsystemsmainlyinclude:transitivitysystem,moodsystemandthemesystem.Transitivitysysteminterpretsandrepresentsourexperienceofphenomenaintheworldandinourconsciousnessbymodelingexperientialmeaningsintermsofparticipants,processesandcircumstances.Moodsystemisthecentralresourceforestablishingandmaintaininganongoingexchangebetweeninteractantsbyassumingandassigningspeechrolessuchasgivingordemandinggoodsandservicesorinformation.Thuswehaveindicatives(includingdeclarativeandinterrogative)andimperatives.Themesystemistheresourceforsettingupalocalcontextforaclausebyselectingalocalpointofdepartureintheflowofinformation—theme.Theremainderofthemessage,thepartinwhichthethemeisdeveloped,iscalledrheme.2.FunctionHavingfinishedhissystemicgrammar,Hallidaydevotedhimselftothemetafunctionsoflanguage:ideationalfunction,interpersonalfunctionandtextualfunction.Ideationalmetafunctionisconcernedwithideation,grammaticalresourcesforconstruingourexperienceoftheworldaroundusandinsideus.Oneofitsmajorgrammaticalsystemsofrealizationistransitivity.Interpersonalmetafunctionisconcernedwiththeinteractionbetweenspeakerandaddressee,thegrammaticalresourcesforenactingsocialrolesingeneral,andspeechrolesinparticular,indialogicinteraction;i.e.forestablishing,changing,andmaintaininginterpersonalrelations.Oneositsmajorgrammaticalsystemsofrealizationismood.Textualmetafunctionisconcernedwiththecreationoftextwiththepresentationofideationalandinterpersonalmeaningsasinformationthatcanbesharedbyspeakerandlistener.Itservestoenablethepresentationofideationalandinterpersonalmeaningasinformationthatcanbeshared:itprovidesthespeakerwithstrategiesforguidingthelistenerinhis/herinterpretationofthetext.Oneofthemajorsystemsofrealizationistheme.Thusthesystemsandfunctionsseemtohavesucharelation:systemsrealizemetafunctionsTransitivityIdeationalfunctionMoodInterpersonalfunctionThemeTextualfunction3.ContextFirth’ssecondconceptionof“context”ledHallidaytorelatelanguagetoextralinguisticphenomena.Theoralandwrittentextsweproducehavetheirparticularlinguisticformbecauseofthesocialpurposetheyfulfill.SoaccordingtoHalliday,languageandsocialcontextarecomplementaryandheinterpretedcontextasincludingtwocommunicationplanes:genre—contextofculture,andregister—contextofsituation.Thecontextofculturecanbethoughtofasderivingfromavastcomplexnetworkofallofthegenreswhichmakeupaparticularculture.Genresarestaged,goalorientedsocialprocessesinwhichpeopleengageasmembersoftheculture.Theyoccurinparticularsituationtypesanditisthecharacteristicsofthissituationtypethatinfluencetheformsoflanguagethatrealizethegenre.9\nSothecontextofsituation(register)isthesecondaspectofsocialcontextthatinfluencesthelinguisticrealizationofthegenre.ThecontextofsituationofatexthadbeentheorizedbyHalliday(HallidayandHasan,1985)intermsofthecontextualvariablesoffield,tenorandmode.Thefieldofdiscoursereferstowhatishappening,tothenatureofthesocialactionthatistakingplace.Thetenorofdiscoursereferstowhoistakingpart,tothenatureoftheparticipants,theirstatusesandroles.Themodeofdiscoursereferstowhatpartlanguageisplaying,whatitisthattheparticipantsareexpectingthelanguagetodofortheminthatsituation.Functionsinvolvethethreesituationalvariablesoffield,tenorandmode:ideationalmeaningsrealizetenorandtextualmeaningsrealizemode.Sothesystems,functionsandcontexthavesucharelation:SystemsrealizemetafunctionsrealizeregisterTransitivityIdeationalfunctionFieldMoodInterpersonalfunctionTenorThemeTextualfunctionMode4.TraditionalGrammarandSFGHalliday(1979)contrastedhisSFGwithtraditionalgrammarasfollows:TraditionalgrammarSFGFormalFunctionRigidFlexibleBasedon“rule”Basedon“resource”SyntacticinfocusSemanticinfocusSentence-orientedText-oriented12.4AmericanStructuralismAmericanstructuralism,alsocalledAmericandescriptivelinguistics,isthemostimportantanddevelopedbranchofstructurallinguistics.IthasoriginatedanddevelopedonthebasisoftheinvestigationandresearchintoAmericanIntolinguistsatthebeginningofthetwentiethcentury.12.4.1BloomfieldTheAmericanstructurallinguisticsowesmuchtotheworkoftheAmericanlinguistLeonardBloomfield,whooutlinedastrictlyscientificbehavioristframeworkforthedescriptionoflanguageinhisbookLanguage.InhisbookLanguage,Bloomfieldfollowstheideathatlinguisticsisabranchofpsychology,especiallybehaviorism.Behavioristsbelievethathumanbeingscannotknowanythingtheyhavenotexperienced.Andbehavioristsinlinguisticsholdthatchildrenlearnlanguagethroughachainof“stimulus-responsereinforcement”,andtheuseoflanguageofadultsisalsoaprocessofstimulus-response.Behavioristsbelievethatactionshavecausesandactionsareresponsestostimuli,andtheirmodelis:Bloomfieldofferedanexampletoexplainhisprocessofstimulus-responsetheory.Supposeaboyandhisgirlfriendaretakingawalk.Thegirlishungryandseessomeapplesonthetree.Shemakessomesoundsandtheboyjumpsoverthefence,climbsupthetree,picksanapple,givesittohisgirlfriend,andhisgirlfriendeatsit.Weanalyzethestoryinthefollowingfigure:Intheabovewell-knownformulaadvancedbyBloomfield,Sstandsforpracticalstimulus,rstandsforthesubstitutereactionofspeech,sstandsforthesubstitutestimulus,andRstandsforexternalpracticalreaction.Bloomfieldalsodistinguished“freeform”and“boundform”inhisgrammaticaldescription.Afreeformreferstoanindependentform;whereasadependentformiscalledaboundform.Theconceptof“morpheme”,aformthathasnophonologicalandsemanticcommonnesswithotherforms,isalsointroducedinhiswriting.9\n12.4.2SapirEdwardSapirisanAmericanlinguistandanthropologist.Hetooktheanthropologicalpointofviewtodescribethenatureandthedevelopmentoflanguage.Later,heandhisstudentBenjaminLeeWhorfdevelopedhisideasandthusformedthewell-knownSapir-WhorfHypothesis,arguingthatlanguagemouldsmind.Thetheoryhasbeenenormouslyinfluentialbuthasforthemostpartbeensupersededbysubsequentresearch.Sapir’sstudiesontheethnologyandlinguisticsorvariousNativeAmericangroupsoftheUnitedStatescontributedgreatlytothedevelopmentofdescriptivelinguistics.12.5Transformational–GenerativeGrammarInthe1950stheschooloflinguisticthought,knownastransformational-generativegrammar,receivedwideacclaimthroughtheworksofNoamChomsky.OriginallyexpoundedbyNoamChomsky,hisstudents,andcolleagues,transformational-generativegrammar(TGG)isanattempttodefinethegrammaticalrulesunderlyingallofthesurfaceexpressionoflanguage.12.5.1Chomsky’sSyntacticStructureChomskyisaneducatorandlinguistwhoseworkinlinguisticshasbeenofgreatinfluencetomodernlinguistics.Hehasdevelopedatheoryoftransformational-generativegrammarthathasrevolutionizedthescientificstudyoflanguage.InhisbookSyntacticStructureswecanfindthefirstexpressionofthe“transformational-generativegrammar”.Andhistheoryofauniversalgrammarhadcertainirresistibleconsequencesforunderstandinghowlanguageislearnedbychildrenandwhatexactlyistheabilitytointerpretlanguage.Chomskypostulatedasyntacticbaseoflanguagecalleddeepstructure,whichconsistsofaseriesofphrasestructurerules,andaseriesofrulescalledtransformationsthatactuponthephrasestructuretoformmorecomplexsentences.Theendresultofatransformational-generativegrammarisasurfacestructurethat,afterthemovement,deletion,insertion,substitutionofwordsandpronunciations,isidenticaltoanactualsentenceofalanguage.Alllanguageshavethesamedeepstructure,buttheydifferfromeachotherinsurfacestructurebecauseoftheapplicationofdifferentrulesfortransformationsandpronunciation.12.5.2Chomsky’sInnatenessHypothesisChomskyargueschildrenarebornwithaninnateknowledgeoflinguisticrulesofhowhumanlanguageshouldbestructured.TheChomskianinnatenesshypothesispostulatesthatthereisnotonlyageneralabilityinhumanstoacquirelanguage,butalsothatthisabilitycomesfromaspecificlanguage-acquisitiondeviceinthebrain,equippedalreadyatbirthwithspecificgrammaticalrulesandprinciples.Chomsky’sInnatenesshypothesisincludemainly:alargepartofthegrammarisinnateanduniversalinallhumanbeings(liketheabilitytowalk,unliketheabilitytorideabike);thepartofthegrammarwhichisnotinnate(andwhichdeterminesthestructuralvariationacrosstheworld’slanguages)islearnedviaalanguage-specificmoduleofthemind/brain.12.5.3Chomsky’sCompetencevs.PerformanceAnotherimportantdistinctionmadeintransformational-generativegrammaristhedifferencebetweenlinguisticcompetence(thesubconsciouscontrolofalinguisticsystem)andlinguisticperformance(thespeaker’sactualuseoflanguage).Wealsohavehadadetailedexplanationofitinthefirstchapter.12.5.4StructuralLinguisticsandT-GGrammarWecomparestructurallinguisticswithT-GGrammarinthefollowingtable:LinguisticschoolStructuralismT-GGrammarKeyfigureBloomfieldChomskyDefinitionoflanguageAsetofhabitsAsetofrulesAiminlinguisticsTodescribelanguageToproduceagrammarTypesofdatacollectedNaturallyoccurringutterancesAnydata9\nMethodologyInductivegeneralizationHypothesis-deductiveViewoflanguagelearningEmpiricism,behaviorismRationalism,mentalism9