scholarly journals ANALISIS KALKULUS PREDIKAT PADA TERJEMAHAN SURAH AL-SAFFAT

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 190
Author(s):  
Siti Ainim Liusti
Keyword(s):  
Choice Theory ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Predicate Calculus ◽  
Sentence Structure

This study based on Chomsky’s generative grammar that about surface and deep structure. It is supported by Bierwish theory about projection rules, and limits choice theory by Katz and Bierwish. Predicate calculus is a study of sentence structure by relation to the componential meaning of the lexicon. Predicate calculus rests on the deep structure to form a sentence. Deep structure is able to describe such as subject, predicate, object, and others. Verb as a predicate is a core of sentence. The purposes of this research is to formulate the types of verbs and describing it  based on predicate calculus. The object of this research is some sentences of the letter translation al-S{a>ffa>t from the Holy Qur’an. There are four types of verbs are : (1) V + NP, it is commonly like V kopula + NP as variation of verb. (2) V + NP + PP, the variation of verb can be V kopula+ NP + PP. (3) V + PP, or verbs can be V kopula + PP. (4) V, without other arguments followed. It can be VP just as a verb. In addition, it is common that the PP may consist of (a) Adj + Prep, and (b) Prep + NP.

scholarly journals A Brief Account of the Base Component of Transformational Generative Grammar

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed M. S. Alduais
Keyword(s):  
Surface Structure ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Semantic Representation ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Standard Theory ◽  
Base Component ◽  
Recent Modification

Purpose: To briefly introduce base component of transformational generative grammar (TGG). Method: The study is mainly descriptive where previous and related studies are reviewed and presented to reach a view about the base component of TGG. Results: Base component serves as input to two basic elements of language which are semantic rules and deep structure. Semantic rules give semantic representation. Deep structure leads to transformational rules or transformations which again lead to surface structure. Conclusions: Base component has been introduced and modified in different stages under standard theory (ST) and then it has been modified to extended standard theory (EST). Later on and as a recent modification of this theory, it has been introduced in terms of what is known in nowadays as revised extended standard theory (REST).

scholarly journals Levels of Representation and Semantic Interpretation

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 01-15
Author(s):  
Howard Lasnik
Keyword(s):  
Surface Structure ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Semantic Interpretation ◽  
Standard Theory ◽  
Important Concern ◽  
Sentence Form ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Syntactic Derivation ◽  
Anaphoric Relations

The nature of the relationship between sentence form and meaning has been an important concern in generative grammar from the inception of the program. Chomsky (1955) raised the question of whether transformations preserve meaning. The suggested answer was negative at that time, and the locus of interpretation was the T-marker, the entire derivational history. In the standard theory of Chomsky (1965), it was proposed, based on work of Katz, Fodor, and Postal, that Deep Structure, a level newly proposed in that work, is the locus of semantic interpretation, though it was acknowledged that quantifiers raise certain difficulties. Those difficulties, along with similar ones involving anaphoric relations, led to the Extended Standard Theory, where Deep and Surface Structure jointly input interpretation, and soon, with the advent of traces, Surface Structure alone. In subsequent models within the GB framework, the derived syntactic level of LF becomes the sole locus of interpretation. Finally, in more recent Minimalist Chomskyan work, there is argued to be no one level of LF; rather, semantic interpretation is interspersed among cyclic steps of the syntactic derivation, reminiscent of the LSLT proposal, though more restricted, and very similar to proposals of Jackendoff and Lasnik in the 1970's. I will try to sort through the motivations for these changes, focusing especially on the problem of quantifier interpretation.

Generative Grammar (GG)

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-304
Author(s):  
Karim Nazari Bagha
Keyword(s):  
Surface Structure ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Semantic Representation ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Standard Theory ◽  
Semantic Component ◽  
Structure Surface ◽  
Phonetic Representation ◽  
Phonological Rules

This article consists of eight parts: introduction, the organization of a Generative Grammar, operation of the system of base rules, deep structure, surface structure and transformational rules, standard theory, extended standard theory, revised extended standard theory, and minimalism. According to Chomsky, the grammar of a language establishes a relationship between sound and meaning, i.e., between phonetic representation and semantic representation. To discover this grammar is the primary goal of linguistics. One of Chomsky's attempts to accomplish this goal is the standard theory grammar, which has been outlined in the article. We note that the grammar consists of three distinct components: the syntactic component, which consists of a Lexicon and two types of syntactic rules, the Base and the Transformational, the phonological component which consists of phonological rules, and the semantic component, which consists of Semantic rules.

scholarly journals ANALISIS KALIMAT BERDASARKAN POLA KALIMAT DASAR DAN KALKULUS PREDIKAT

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 157
Author(s):  
Siti Ainim Liusti
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Pattern Analysis ◽  
Predicate Calculus ◽  
Sentence Structure ◽  
Core Component ◽  
Single Sentence ◽  
Sentence Patterns ◽  
Basic Sentence ◽  
Object Of Study ◽  
Compound Sentence

This study aims to analyze the sentences based on the basic sentence patterns of Indonesian and predicate calculus. These approaches put the predicate as a core component in the sentence structure. The object of study is focused on declarative sentences of Indonesian. The data analysis consists of several stages. Basic sentence patterns of Indonesian consist of identifying the type of sentences, identifying the elements forming sentences, and putting on elements which are based on basic sentence patterns of Indonesian. Predicate calculus consists of identifying atomic or compound propositions, determining the predicate and other components, defining a form of expression predicate calculus, and making a notation function. The results showed that the basic sentence pattern analysis only identifies the internal elements in a single sentence, while the predicate calculus can as well identifies the internal elements of a single or compound sentence.

The origin and developmemt of generative semantics

1993 ◽  
Vol 20 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 399-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randy Allen Harris
Keyword(s):  
Early Development ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Central Element ◽  
Predicate Calculus ◽  
Abstract Syntax ◽  
Active Participant ◽  
Transformational Model ◽  
Lexical Structure ◽  
George Lakoff

Summary Against the background of the controversial and polarized work of Frederick Newmeyer and Robin Tolmach Lakoff, this paper chronicles the early development of generative semantics, an internal movement within the transformational model of Chomsky’s Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. The first suggestions toward the movement, whose cornerstone was the obliteration of the syntax-semantics boundary, were by George Lakoff in 1963. But it was the work conducted under the informal banner of “Abstract Syntax” by Paul Postal that began the serious investigations leading to such an obliteration. Lakoff was an active participant in that research, as were Robin Tolmach Lakoff, John Robert (“Háj”) Ross and James D. McCawley. Through their combined efforts, particularly those of McCawley on semantic primitives and lexical insertion, generative semantics took shape in 1967: positing a universal base, importing notions from predicate calculus, decomposing lexical structure, and, most contentiously, rejecting the central element of the Aspects model, deep structure.

The Beauty of Deep Structure

2021 ◽  
pp. 15-64
Author(s):  
Randy Allen Harris
Keyword(s):  
Computer Science ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Literary Studies ◽  
Technical Level ◽  
Educational Funding ◽  
Transformational Grammar ◽  
Language Classrooms ◽  
Cognitive Revolution

This chapter charts the rise of Noam Chomsky’s Transformational-Generative Grammar, from its cornerstone role in the cognitive revolution up to its widely heralded realization in Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. That realization featured the development of an evocative concept, Deep Structure, a brilliant nexus of meaning and structure that integrates seamlessly with Chomsky’s companion idea, Universal Grammar, the notion that all languages share a critical, genetically encoded core. At a technical level, Deep Structure concentrated meaning because of the Katz-Postal Principle, stipulating that transformations cannot change meaning. Transformations rearrange structure while keeping meaning stable. The appeal of Deep Structure and Universal Grammar helped Transformational Grammar propagate rapidly into language classrooms, literary studies, stylistics, and computer science, gave massive impetus to the emergence of psycholinguistics, attracted substantial military and educational funding, and featured prominently in Chomsky’s meteoric intellectual stardom.

scholarly journals Transformational Linguistics and the Implication Towards Second Language Learning

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Noor Khasanah
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Surface Structure ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Mental Representations ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Teaching English ◽  
The World ◽  
Universal Pattern

The essence of Chomsky’s approach to language is the claim that there are linguistic universals in domain of syntax. He felt confident to show that syntax can be defined for any given language. For Chomsky, the nature of such mental representations is largely innate, so if a grammatical theory has explanatory adequacy it must be able to explain the various grammatical nuances of the languages of the world as relatively minor variations in the universal pattern of human language. In teaching English as L2, therefore knowing syntax and grammar of the language is important. Transformational Generative Grammar gives adequate elaboration in understanding them. Thus, the learners are expected to be able to avoid such ambiguity in interpreting the deep structure of a sentence since ambiguity will lead other people as the listeners or hearers of the speakers to misinterpret either consciously or unconsciously. Keywords: Surface Structure;   Deep Structure;  Constituent;  Transformation 

IDEOLOGY AND LINGUISTIC THEORY: NOAM CHOMSKY AND THE DEEP STRUCTURE DEBATES.Geoffrey J. Huck and John A. Goldsmith. London: Routledge, 1995. Pp. 186. $25.00 cloth.

1997 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-402
Author(s):  
Susanne Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Deep Structure ◽  
Scientific Progress ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Central Focus ◽  
Noam Chomsky ◽  
Informative Case ◽  
Cast Doubt ◽  
Deductive Science

The authors begin their book with the assertion, “Many linguists today assume that theirs is an empirical and deductive science, and that scientific progress in the domain of their research is possible” (p. 1). They then proceed in an interesting, well-written, and informative case study of the evolution of generative grammar to cast doubt on the veracity of this assertion. The central focus is the nature of the debates among researchers developing what came to be known as generative semantics and interpretive semantics. The book attempts to detail who influenced whom and who was interested in what. More particularly, Huck and Goldsmith ask to what extent data, analyses, and argumentation were critical to the debates. The central question is: To what extent were generativist scholars moved one way or the other by rational considerations? The answer, not surprisingly, is: Not much. The real story is one about personalities, not about truth and reason. They attempt to explain why paying particular attention to the personalities involved, the role of the linguistic institutions where the participants worked, and the research agendas of each is important.

scholarly journals SA-HAVE: A Self-Attention based Hierarchical VAEs Network for Abstractive Summarization

2021 ◽  
Vol 2078 (1) ◽  
pp. 012073
Author(s):  
Xia Wan ◽  
Shenggen Ju
Keyword(s):  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Research Direction ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Sentence Structure ◽  
Automatic Summarization ◽  
Daily Mail ◽  
Structure Information ◽  
Abstractive Summarization ◽  
Important Research Direction

Abstract The abstractive automatic summarization task is to summarize the main content of the article with short sentences, which is an important research direction in natural language generation. Most abstractive summarization models are based on sequence-to-sequence neural networks. Specifically, they encode input text sequences by Bi-directional Long Short-Term Memory (bi-LSTM), and decode summaries word-by-word by LSTM. However, existing models usually did not consider both the self-attention dependence during the encoding process using bi-LSTM, and deep potential sentence structure information for the decoding process. To tackle these limitations, we propose a Self-Attention based word embedding and Hierarchical Variational AutoEncoders (SA-HVAE) model. The model first introduces self-attention into LSTM to alleviate information decay of encoding, and accomplish summarization with deep structure information inference through hierarchical VAEs. The experimental results on the Gigaword and CNN/Daily Mail datasets validate the superior performance of SA-HVAE, and our model has a significant improvement over the baseline model.

scholarly journals Transformational Linguistics and the Implication Towards Second Language Learning

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Noor Khasanah
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
Deep Structure ◽  
Mental Representations ◽  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Teaching English ◽  
The World ◽  
Universal Pattern

The essence of Chomsky’s approach to language is the claim that there are linguistic universals in domain of syntax. He felt confident to show that syntax can be defined for any given language. For Chomsky, the nature of such mental representations is largely innate, so if a grammatical theory has explanatory adequacy it must be able to explain the various grammatical nuances of the languages of the world as relatively minor variations in the universal pattern of human language. In teaching English as L2, therefore knowing syntax and grammar of the language is important. Transformational Generative Grammar gives adequate elaboration in understanding them. Thus, the learners are expected to be able to avoid such ambiguity in interpreting the deep structure of a sentence since ambiguity will lead other people as the listeners or hearers of the speakers to misinterpret either consciously or unconsciously.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document