Provided for non-commercial research and educational use only. Not for reproduction or distribution or commercial use This article was originally published in the Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, Second Edition, published by Elsevier, and the attached copy is provided by Elsevier for the author's benefit and for the benefit of the author's institution, for noncommercial research and educational use including without limitation use in instruction at your institution, sending it to specific colleagues who you know, and providing a copy to your institution’s administrator. All other uses, reproduction and distribution, including without limitation commercial reprints, selling or licensing copies or access, or posting on open internet sites, your personal or institution’s website or repository, are prohibited. For exceptions, permission may be sought for such use through Elsevier's permissions site at: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissionusematerial Aarts B (2006), Grammar. In: Keith Brown, (Editor-in-Chief) Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, Second Edition, volume 5, pp. 113-115. Oxford: Elsevier. Grammar 113 Grammar B Aarts, University College London, London, UK ß 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. The Term ‘Grammar’ developed by Noam Chomsky, and can have several meanings: it can refer to the mental blueprint that all humans are said to be endowed with (Universal Grammar, UG), or to the grammar that has evolved in an individual human being as a result of the interaction of the principles of UG with a particular linguistic environment (‘That construction is not part of my grammar’). Finally, it can refer to a linguist’s theory of the grammar of a particular language. In what follows, this article will give a brief overview of the syntactic components of grammar. Au th or 's Pe rs There are many different ways in which the term ‘grammar’ can be understood. In its most widely used sense, grammar comprises syntax (the study of sentence structure) and morphology (the study of the structure of words). ‘Grammar’ can also refer to a physical object, i.e., a book, and one can felicitously say ‘‘I have at least six different grammars of English on my bookshelf.’’ A grammar in this sense is a description of a language, and can be written from different perspectives. Thus, school grammars have as their aim to teach the basic principles of grammar. They are usually simplified and can be relatively unsophisticated. They also tend to be prescriptive in outlook, rather than descriptive. School grammars were very widely used in the 18th and 19th centuries. Similar in their aims, but more modern in outlook, because they are based on research in modern linguistics and are descriptive in outlook, are pedagogical grammars. These are used in many different teaching environments: secondary schools, foreign language teaching schools, as well as universities. Nineteenth century descriptive accounts of particular languages are called traditional grammars, while their modern (i.e., post-1950) counterparts are usually referred to as descriptive grammars or reference grammars. These works provide lengthy and detailed accounts of the entire field of grammar (as defined at the beginning of this article). On the history of grammar writing in English, see Linn (2005). The term ‘grammar’ has also been used in a more specialized sense in the framework of linguistics Ritter N A (1997). ‘Headedness as a means of encoding stricture.’ In Booij G & vander Weijer J (eds.) Phonology in progress-progress in phonology. Leiden: Holland Academic Graphics. 333–365. Ritter N A (1999). ‘The effect of intrasegmental licensing conditions on elemental spreading.’ In Hannahs S J & Davenport M (eds.) Issues in phonological structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 55–74. Ritter N A (forthcoming). ‘Georgian consonant clusters: the complexity is in the structure not the melody.’ In Rennison J, Neubarth F & Pochtrager M (eds.) Phonologica 2002. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Scheer T (2004). A lateral theory of phonology: what is CVCV, and why should it be? Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. on al C op y structures, derivations. London/New York: Longman. 289–332. Kaye J, Lowenstamm J & Vergnaud J-R (1985). ‘The internal structure of phonological representations: a theory of charm and government.’ Phonology Yearbook 2, 305–328. Kaye J, Lowenstamm J & Vergnaud J-R (1990). ‘Constituent structure and government in phonology.’ Phonology 7, 193–231. Lowenstamm J (1996). ‘CV as the only syllable type.’ In Durand J & Laks B (eds.) Current trends in phonology: models and methods, vol. 2. Manchester: European Studies Research Institute. 419–442. Ritter N A (1995). The role of universal grammar in phonology: a Government Phonology approach to Hungarian. Ph.D. diss., New York University. Grammatical Categories, Functions, and Thematic Roles All grammatical frameworks make use of categories such as word classes (noun, verb, adjective, etc.) and most also make use of phrases (noun phrase, verb phrase, adjective phrase, etc.). These combine to form clauses and sentences. The sentence in (1) can be represented as in (2) below, where word classes are indicated by means of a labeled bracketing: (1) The chirpy postman claimed that he handed me the letters yesterday in the morning. (2) [S/MC [NP [Det the] [AP chirpy] [N postman]] [VP [V claimed] [SC [SCJ that] [NP [N he]] [VP [V handed] [NP [N me]] [NP [Det the][N letters]] [NP[N yesterday]][PP [P in] [NP [Det the] [N morning]]]]]]] S¼sentence, MC¼main clause, NP¼noun phrase, Det¼determiner, N¼noun, AP¼ adjective phrase, VP¼verb phrase, V¼verb, SC¼subordinate clause, SCJ¼subordinating conjunction, PP¼prepositional phrase Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2006), vol. 5, pp. 113–115 114 Grammar the units are not dependent on, or embedded within, each other. Examples of coordination are given in (3): (3) [Tom] and [Harry] [the postman] and [his wife] [cheap] and [cheerful] [grudgingly] and [reluctantly] [in the house] and [on the stairs] on al C op y We have already come across an example of subordination. In (1), the that-clause is a subordinate clause. Such clauses can perform a variety of functions. As we have seen, in (1) the clause functions as direct object. In (4) it functions as subject, while in (5) it functions as an adjunct: (4) That the minister should resign is obvious. (5) We expected to arrive on time, when we left home. In (4) the subordinate clause is said to be embedded, because it is one of the obligatory elements required by the verb, while this is not the case in (5) (see Subordination). Systems of Grammar Grammars of languages make use of a number of systems of grammar. Each of these provides users of languages with a set of choices for a given classification. We distinguish three types of systems. What we might call pattern systems comprise a set of choices for a given classification. Interface systems linguistically encode a particular real world concept, eventuality, situation, or set of related meanings into a particular grammatical form or pattern. Finally, information-ordering systems offer users ways of presenting the propositional content of an utterance in different ways. Examples of each type of system follow below. An example of a pattern system is a classification of clauses which comprises the declarative, imperative, interrogative, and exclamative types: Au th or 's Pe rs Further grammatical categories include gender, number, and case. Words that belong together distributionally as units are called constituents (all the bracketed strings in (2)). Not all linguists recognize the concept of constituent. In dependency frameworks, only the relationships between words are recognized. All the labels assigned to the categories in (2) are form labels, which also perform a particular function. This includes the most prominent element of each phrase, referred to as its head. In addition, in (1)/(2) the NP the postman functions as the subject of the sentence, while the verb claim functions as predicator. The subordinate that-clause functions as the direct object (DO) of the verb, while within the subordinate clause, he is the subject, handed is the predicator, me is an indirect object (IO), the letters is direct object, and yesterday is an adjunct. The form and function classes are defined primarily with reference to their distribution in most frameworks, though some frameworks opt to define the classes semantically and/or pragmatically. Conventionalized patterns of language are called constructions. The notion of construction can be defined very narrowly (e.g., determiner þ noun) or more broadly (for example, the What’s X doing Y? construction, e.g., What’s this cork doing in my glass of wine? discussed in Kay and Fillmore, 1999). Some linguists argue that constructions do not play a role in grammar at all; they regard them merely as epiphenomena (Chomsky, 1995: 170), i.e., as derivative entities with no primitive role to play. At the syntax–semantics interface, the phrase the postman and the that-clause in the main clause, as well as the subject, IO and DO of the subordinate clause carry thematic roles. These concern the semantic role played by the constituents in the eventuality or situation expressed by the predicator. Thus in (1) the postman has the role of agent (active, animate instigator) in both clauses, while me has the role of recipient. The letters is the patient/undergoer of the action, sometimes also referred to as theme. There is no agreed set of thematic roles, but most linguists would recognize, in addition to the roles named above, instrument, locative, and source. Not all linguists agree that the categories that are set up in particular grammars can always be strictly kept separate; some frameworks allow for gradience within and/or between categories. Coordination and Subordination Coordination and subordination are ways for languages to link units. When we coordinate units, we link units that are syntactically at the same level, i.e., (6) Tom always eats his dinner quickly. (7) Does Tom always eat his dinner quickly? (8) Eat your dinner quickly! (9) How quickly Tom eats his dinner! declarative interrogative imperative exclamative Each of these patterns has its own unique syntactic properties, e.g., subject-auxiliary inversion in the case of interrogatives, or the lack of a subject in the case of imperatives. The pronoun classifications of languages constitute another example of pattern systems. English uses you to address an interlocutor, while other languages Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2006), vol. 5, pp. 113–115 Grammar, Early Medieval 115 (10) Kofi be yè-dzo Kofi say LOG-leave ‘‘Kofi said that he (¼Kofi) left.’’ (11) Kofi be e-dzo Kofi say 3.SG-leave ‘‘Kofi said that he/she (6¼Kofi) left.’’ Grammar Models As noted at the beginning of this article, this overview of grammar is not wholly uncontroversial. In linguistic science, a large number of grammar models exist, among them Transformational Generative Grammar, Cognitive Grammar, (Radical) Construction Grammar, Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Lexical-Functional Grammar, and Dependency Grammar. These are discussed in separate articles. See also: Subordination. Bibliography Chomsky N (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press. Clements G N (1975). ‘The logophoric pronoun in Ewe: its role in discourse.’ Journal of West African Languages 10, 141–177. Kay P & Fillmore C J (1999). ‘Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: the What’s X doing Y? construction.’ Language 75(1), 1–33. König E & Siemund P (2000). ‘Locally free self-forms, logophoricity, and intensification in English.’ English Language and Linguistics 4(2), 183–204. Linn A (2006). ‘Grammar writing.’ In Aarts B & McMahon A (eds.) The handbook of English linguistics. Malden: Blackwell Publishers. Pe rs In (10) the logophoric element yè indicates that the subject of the subordinate clause is to be interpreted as the same as the subject of the main clause, while no such interpretation is required for (11). Examples of interface systems are tense, aspect, and mood. Tense is the way a language grammaticalizes (encodes) the real-world concept of time. Aspect is concerned with the way a particular event is viewed as progressing in time, while mood is the way a grammar encodes concepts such as necessity, possibility, permission, uncertainty, etc. Voice is an example of an information–ordering system. Compare the two sentences below: the components are presented. Thus (12) is more likely in a situation where the invaders have already been mentioned in the preceding cotext, and the churches represent new information, while in (13) it is the other way round. As before, different languages make different uses of the systems of grammar. on al C op y may have informal and polite forms, such as French tu/vous, German du/Sie, Dutch jij/U, etc. Some languages (especially in Africa) make use of logophoric pronouns. These typically occur in the subject position of clauses that are complements of verbs of saying, perception, cognition, etc., and indicate the person from whose point of view the proposition expressed is presented. Here is an example from Clements (1975: 142), cited in König and Siemund (2000): (12) The invaders demolished all the churches Au th or 's (13) All the churches were demolished by the invaders. These sentences have the same meaning (i.e., they express the same proposition), but differ in the way Grammar, Early Medieval A Luhtala, University of Finland, Helsinki, Finland ß 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This article deals with the development of language studies from about 600 to 1100, a period which is conveniently divided into two by the Carolingian Renaissance (ca. 800 A.D.). The first medieval centuries are properly the Age of Grammar, whose method had established itself as an indispensable tool for Bible study. The study of dialectic and rhetoric were revived in the Carolingian reform, whereby the scheme of the Seven Liberal Arts was reinforced as the basis of secular learning. Medieval scholars held a unified approach to the study of the Liberal Arts, whose methods were in a constant interaction with each other and with theology. In the Carolingian Renaissance, the dialectic began to receive an increasingly important role as a general tool of study relevant for all learning, both secular and religious. The dialectical method influenced the study of grammar in a manner that became fundamental for medieval culture. The origins of this development, which culminated in the speculative Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2006), vol. 5, pp. 113–115