ATEG Archives

November 1999

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
EDWARD VAVRA <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 1 Nov 1999 13:37:02 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
It was Bill McCleary, not me, who suggested the strength of generative grammar. (See below.) I don't see the case as indicating the inadequacy of traditional grammar any more than it shows the inadequacy of generative. It seems to me that generative grammar misses the question of natural language development and focusses too much on the "generation" of individual sentences.
     In the case in point, I suspect that the earlier (younger) version of the text would be:

"People are blaming Terry's parents for his actions. They are not blaming Terry."

This sentence is, because of vocabulary and content, complicated, but it is essentially similar to the young child's "We went to the park, and we played baseball," i.e., the string of S/V/(C) patterns. As the child gets older, he/she learns to delete (ellipse) the repeated subject, thereby combining the two clauses into one: "We went to the park and played baseball." The question needs more research, but I suggest that yes, every compound involves the process of ellipsis, or, if one prefers the term, "reduction."


>>> "William J. McCleary" <[log in to unmask]> 10/29 3:11 PM >>>
Could this be a case showing the inadequacies of traditional grammar and
the strengths of generative? If we accept Emily's explanation, we would
have to assume that every compound has an elipsis--or, rather, is formed
through the process of elipsis.

We could instead say that the sentence is generated from two kernels,
something like this:

People are blaming Terry's parents for Terry's actions.
People are not blaming Terry for his actions.

Bill

>I agree completely with Emily.
>
>>>> emily wilson-orzechowski <[log in to unmask]> 10/29 1:10 PM >>>
>Michael,
>    I would read the sentence you ask about as "People are blaming
>Terry's parents and (are) not (blaming) Terry for his actions."  The
>negative version of the verb is shortened through elipsis and "parents"
>is the object of the positive version, and "Terry" is the object of the
>negative one.  "Not" is an adverb with the second verb (implied).
>
>Emily Wilson-Orzechowski


William J. McCleary
3247 Bronson Hill Road
Livonia, NY 14487
716-346-6859

ATOM RSS1 RSS2