Section 1

One of the first advocates of transformational grammar (also known as generative

grammar) was Noam Chomsky, whose book, Syntactic Structures, appeared in 1957.
Chomsky regarded irregularities in speech performance as similar to personal mistakes
in multiplication that did not change the rules.

Chomsky's objective was to find "rules" that, if followed, would generate all possible
grammatical sentences in language. The rules were not to be directives, but rather
explicit statements of the knowledge that a community must have to communicate
successfully. He assumed that all members of a group would know the same rules.
Anyone who did not know those rules or who knew another set of rules was not quite a
"member of the community."

Chomsky and those who worked with him were primarily interested in the competence
of individual speakers. Chomsky believed that traditional grammar, although it gave a
full account of exceptions and irregularities, only made available to the student a few
examples of regular constructions and expected him to understand and to use the
numerous exceptions. Structural linguists, according to Chomsky, go too deeply into
structure and limit themselves to inventories of systems of elements, but provide little
insight into the way in which a person forms and interprets sentences. He attempted
through transformational grammar to analyze the processes of sentence formation and
sentence interpretation that a speaker or listener must master in order to be competent.

Section 2

Chomsky's grammar has three parts: (1) phrase structure rules that analyze the
underlying structure of kernel sentences (one which consists of a noun phrase and a
verb phrase, both in their simplest form), (2) transformational rules that show how more
complicated sentences can be generated from the kernel sentence, and (3)
morphophonemic rules that convert abstract forms into pronounceable utterances.
• The most basic phrase structure rule (PSR) is:

S NP + VP.
S stands for sentence,
means either consists of or rewrite as,
NP means noun phrase,
VP means verb phrase.

In phrase structure rules, the term appearing to the left of the arrow is always rewritten
or restated as the information which appears to the right of the arrow. The phrase
structure rule stated above, when translated from symbols into ordinary English, reads
as follows:

“A sentence (S) consists of a noun phrase (NP) plus a verb phrase (VP).”

Notice that (NP) and (VP) are subcategories of (S).

Each of the categories NP and VP can also appear to the right of the arrow and be
rewritten as a grouping of subcategories.

S NP + VP.

NP (DET) N

VP V (NP)

The first of the two rules above can be restated as follows: A noun phrase (NP) consists
of an optional determiner (DET) and a noun (N). The second rule reads: A verb phrase
(VP) consists of a verb (V) and an optional noun phrase (NP). Any terms to the right of
the arrow which cannot be rewritten are called terminal nodes. In the example above,
both N and V are terminal nodes.

The three rules shown above can be combined to form a group of phrase structure rules
which represent all English sentences containing those categories or constituents.
Another set of rules can be added which generates specific words or lexical categories.
Thus, the phrase structure rules for a sentence such as John hit the ball appear as
follows.

S NP + VP.

NP (DET) N

VP V (NP)
DET the

N John, ball

V hit

A kernel sentence consists of a noun phrase and a verb phrase, both in their simplest
form. Any variation from this basic pattern is called a transform. For example, John hit
the ball is a sentence in its simplest form. John is a noun phrase (NP) composed of a
noun. Hit the ball is a verb phrase (VP) composed of a transitive verb (VT) plus a noun
phrase (DET + noun). An example of a transform is the restatement of John hit the ball
into the question Did John hit the ball?

This type of analysis makes possible an orderly and regular manipulation of sentence
elements and avoids the confusion that sometimes results from definitions based on
meaning. Traditional grammar says that the active voice indicates that the subject does
the acting. Transformational grammar, however, advocates use of "Slattery took a hard
right to the jaw," to show that exceptions to this rule exist. Although an active voice verb
is used in the sentence, the subject, Slattery, receives the action of the verb, took.

Transformations that can convert a kernel sentence into a more complicated sentence
include the creation of *negatives from positives, of *passives from actives, and of
*questions from statements, as well as *adding, deleting, or rearranging the elements of
the kernel sentence. The transformational rules make possible generation, or creation,
of every conceivable grammatical sentence.

By no means do these two grammars, structural and transformational, answer all the
needs for grammar. Several major problems or weaknesses exist.

Structural linguistics and transformational grammars are still in transition. Since they are
constantly developing and changing, it is difficult for the learner to understand language
taught from these approaches. The rules are ambiguous and not easy either to
understand or to follow.

Future possibilities for the teaching of English cannot be predicted. Another grammar
approach may emerge as a result of the continuing search for new and better methods.
Traditional grammar may undergo gradual modification as it has with the functional
approach used today. Studies may show, however, that the functional grammar of today
may prove to be the best method of all.