RELEVANCE
Can’t we just observe language and describe it without bothering with difficult things like
theories? The human mind always operates with some notion of the way the universe
works. The human mind finds it easier to understand things if we break it down into
smaller pieces
You can observe what goes in and out of the box, but you can’t observe what goes on
inside which changes the input to the output –By studying the input and output we can
imagine what must be going on inside –Imagined processes = theory
We can only study what we can observe We can observe sound – So we can study
phonetics If we assume that phonology is based on phonetics, we can study phonology
too If we assume that morphology is based on phonology, we can study morphology If
we assume that syntax is based on morphology, we can study syntax We can’t study
semantics – leave that to philosophers
Rationalist approach –The mind exists and can be studied –Some knowledge comes
from the mind itself Discovery procedures are foolish and limiting –You get your data
from wherever you can find it (not limited to observable data – i.e. Intuition also
acceptable)
It is that branch of linguistics that is most concerned with developing models of linguistic
knowledge.
Articulatory phonetics analyses the movements of speech organs by which certain
sounds are produced. Auditory phonetics is concerned with the perception of speech
sounds through the ear (hence auditory), and begins with the anatomy of this organ in a
similar way to articulatory phonetics. Acoustic phonetics studies the physical aspects of
speech sounds.
Auditory phonetics is the branch of theoretical linguistics concerned with speech sounds
at a higher level than phonetics, i.e their structure and organisation in human
languages.
“A person who knows a language has mastered a system of rules that assigns sound
and meaning in a definite class of possible sentences.” - Noam Chomsky
They also recognize ambiguities, know when different sentences mean the same thing,
and correctly interpret the grammatical relations in a sentence, such as subject and
direct object. This kind of knowledge comes from their knowledge of the rules of syntax.
The notion of structure stays –Words group into phrases –Phrases group into sentences
New type of rule for producing structure –S NP VP A set of such rules makes a
Phrase Structure Grammar –Grammar is a set of rules that are part of the mind
But phrase structure rules are not enough to describe human languages –Discontinuous
constituents [A man with blue eyes] walked into a shop [A man] walked into a shop [with
blue eyes] To describe this phenomena we need transformations –Rules which alter
structures to form other structures (e.g. By moving things about)
What does the grammar manipulate? – From structuralism we have always assumed
that words are the basis of syntax – But transformational analyses started to discover
that units smaller than words undergo syntactic processes: He is always sad He always
phones his mother – Some have suggested that this leads to a theory where syntax
always manipulates items smaller than the word and that words are constructed by
syntax
SOURCES