1

A COMPARATIVE ROLE OF TRADITIONAL AND

TRANSFORMATIONAL-GENERATIVE GRAMMAR IN

LANGUAGE DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS

BY

NITE, SCHOLAR .U.

REG. NO: PG/MA/04/39217

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH AND LITERARY STUDIES,

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA

SUPERVISOR: DR. P.A. EZEMA

APRIL 2012

2

TITLE PAGE

A COMPARATIVE ROLE OF TRADITIONAL AND TRANSFORMATIONAL-

GENERATIVE GRAMMAR IN LANGUAGE DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS

3

APPROVAL PAGE

This project has been approved by the Department of English and Literary Studies,

University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

By

--------------------------- -----------------------------

DR P.A EZEMA PROF. A.N. AKWANYA

SUPERVISOR HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

------------------------------------

EXTERNAL EXAMINER

4

CERTIFICATION

I certify that Nite Scholarstica Udoka, a postgraduate student in the Department

of English and Literary Studies with Registration number PG/MA/04/39217 has

satisfactorily completed the requirements for the course and research work for the degree

of Masters of Arts in English as a second language.

The work embodied in this thesis has not been submitted in part or full for

any diploma or degree of this or any other university.

--------------------------- -----------------------------

Dr P.A. Ezema Prof. A.N. Akwanya

Supervisor Head of Department

-----------------------------

External Examiner

5

DEDICATION

This research work is dedicated to my husband, Mr E.C. Nite.

6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am indebted to my project supervisor, Dr P.A. Ezema. He was kind and patient

in correcting all my errors throughout my research work, you are a rare and wonderful

star. I really enjoyed every bit of my encounter with you. They were quite enriching and

rewarding. I pray that God will reward you.

My special thanks go to the entire staff of the department of English and Literary

studies especially Rev. Fr. Prof. A.N. Akwanya, Head, Department of English and

Literary Studies. I am grateful for the cooperation, encouragement and corrections he

has given me throughout the process of this study.

I would like to extend my appreciation to Prof. Sam Onuigbo, Prof. Damian

Opata, Dr. Chibuzo Onunkwo etc. for their professional advice and contribution towards

the successful completion of this work.

My appreciation goes to my husband, Mr. E.C. Nite for his financial support and

encouragement.

I am also indebted to my brother, Mr. Emeka Anthony Obi (Nchedoobi), for his

financial support. He always gives listening ears anytime I call on him for financial

support.

I also acknowledge those whose works were consulted during the course of this

research.

7

Finally, my success would not have been possible without the assistance of God

Almighty, Who kept me fit until the end of the programme. I say to you and you alone

God of power and mighty be all glory and majesty now forever, amen.

8

ABSTRACT

English is very important language for the purpose of education, commerce,

mass media and also the language for interethnic communication. An adequate

knowledge of English is an indispensable requirement for anyone who wishes

to interact with other different English speaking countries.

Consequently, there have been complaints that the teaching of English language

in our school is not very effective. It would seem that it is actually becoming

lower rather than improving. The reason is that the teaching of grammar is de-

emphasized.

The purpose of this project is to seek for a way of improving on the English

language. This research evaluates the relevance of traditional and

transformational – generative grammars to language teaching and learning with

particular reference to the English language.

The thesis is divided into five chapters. Chapter one is the introduction while

chapter two reviews the works of other experts on the topic of the study.

Chapter three discusses the contributions of traditional grammar to language

teaching and learning. Chapter four examines the roles of transformational –

generative grammar in language teaching and learning. In chapter five, an

evaluation of two grammars is done pedagogically followed by the conclusion.

9

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Title page - - - - - - - - - - i

Approval page - - - - - - - - - ii

Certification - - - - - - - - - iii

Dedication - - - - - - - - - - iv

Acknowledgments- - - - - - - - - v

Abstract - - - - - - - - - - vi

Table of Contents - - - - - - - - - vii

1.1 Brief Definition of Grammar - - - - - - 1

1.2 The Roles of Grammar in Language Teaching - - - - 2

1.3 The Status of English in Nigeria - - - - - - 4

1.4 Language Acquisition Versus Language Learning - - - 7

1.5 Statement of the Problems - - - - - - - 10

1.6 Purpose of the Study - - - - - - - 11

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Importance of Grammar in Language Teaching - - - - 13

2.2 An Evaluative Study of Traditional Grammar to Language

Teaching and Learning - - - - - - - 15

2.3 An Evaluative Study of Transformational Generative

Grammar - - - - - - - - - 16

2.4 The Theories of Language Learning - - - - - 18

2.4.1 Behaviorists Approach - - - - - - - 18

10

2.4.2 The Nativist View - - - - - - - - 20

2.4.3 Interactionist View - - - - - - - - 20

11

2.5 The Influence of Linguistic Theories and Description

on Language Teaching - - - - - - - 21

2.6 Methods of Language Teaching and Learning - - - - 24

2.6.1 The Audio Lingual Method - - - - - -

2.6.2 Grammar Translation Method - - - - - - 11

2.6.3 Direct Methods - - - - - - - - 12

2.6.4 The Eclectic Method - - - - - - - 12

CHAPTER THREE: TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR

3.1 Background Information on Traditional Grammar - - - 14

3.2 The Roles of Traditional Grammar in Language

Description and Analysis - - - - - - - 16

3.2.1 Parts of Speech - - - - - - - - 16

3.2.2 Phrase and Clausal Analysis - - - - - - 18

3.2.3 Sentence Analysis - - - - - - - - 18

3.2.4 Case Analysis - - - - - - - - 19

3.2.5 Tenses and Aspect - - - - - - - - 19

3.2.6 Phonology - - - - - - - - - 20

3.3 Criticism Leveled against Traditional Grammar - - - 21

CHAPTER FOUR: TRANFORMATION GRAMMAR

4.1 Background Information on Transformational

Generative Grammar - - - - - - - 24

4.2 The Roles of Transformational-Generative Grammar

12

in Language Description and Analysis - - - - - 25

4.2.1 Difference Between Competence and Performance - - - 25

4.2.2 Existence of Deep and Surface Structure - - - - - 25

4.2.3 Innate Theory of Language Acquisition - - - - - 27

4.2.4 Resolution of Ambiguity - - - - - - - 28

4.2.5 Difference Between Grammatically and Ungrammatical - - 29

4.2.6 Distinction between L – and E – Languages - - - - 30

4.2.7 Use of Complex and Abstract Rules - - - - - 30

4.3 Criticism Leveled against Transformational

Generative Grammar - - - - - - - 33

CHAPTER FIVE: EVALUATION OF THE TWO

GRAMMARS ON PEDAGOGIC GROUND

5.1 Evaluation of Traditional Grammar on Pedagogic Ground - - 36

5.2 Evaluation of Transformational-Generative

Grammar of Pedagogic Ground - - - - - - 38

5.3 Conclusion - - - - - - - - - 39

Works Cited - - - - - - - -

13

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BRIEF DEFINITIONS OF GRAMMMAR

Before going into the discussion of the above topic, it may be necessary

to make an effort to get clear in our minds the senses in which the word

„Grammar‟ is used in this thesis since different people have different notions of

the term „Grammar‟. Grammar according to the Encyclopedia Britannica (Vol

5: 410), is a set of rules of language governing the sounds, words, sentences and

other elements as well as their combination and interpretation.

Boadi et al (1968: 8), quoting Tomori, observe four different notions of

grammar. The first notion is that of grammar as the quality of linguistic

competence of a speaker of a language, a quality determined from the quality of

the person‟s actual performance in speech. The second notion is that grammar is

seen as a book embodying the morphological and syntactic rules of a particular

language. In the third definition, they see Grammar as a set of descriptive

statement about the syntax and morphology of a language.

Finally, grammar is also understood by them as prescriptive rules about

how a language should be written or spoken.

14

By looking at these definitions carefully, one thing will occur to us; that

is, that language functions as a system based on a set of rules. Our present-day

knowledge of language has convinced us that any speaker of a language

consciously or unconsciously applies these rules (rightly or wrongly) when he

writes or speaks that language. Grammar, as conceived in this paper, therefore,

deals with the rules that govern the internal structure of every language. The

reason for the study of grammar is to make our knowledge of language more

complete.

1.2 THE ROLES OF GRAMMAR IN LANGUAGE TEACHING AND

LEARNING

Grammar is the instrument of language teaching. In the grammar of every

language, each utterance is put together according to some principles which

determine what are used, the form and the order of the words. It is in view of

this that De Saussure (1916) observes that languages are interrelated and each

term depends solely upon the other ones. This view of language, as shown by

Saussure, forms the basis of modern linguistics. It is a basic feature of a

language system that the functioning parts hang together and condition one

another. The result is that each part acquires a contrastive value which it derives

from its membership in the system. This is why the concern of linguists is to

15

investigate critically the structure of a language through controlled and

verifiable observations. Commenting on the importance of grammar, Brook

(1964) asserts that we must bear in mind that grammar is to language what

anatomy is to the human body. Every living body and even a dead one are

bound to have anatomy. The same is true of language and grammar. To say that

grammar can be brushed aside as inconsequential or irrelevant is of course

nonsense.

Moreover, grammar helps in the study of the nature of language. Each

language has a grammar and what distinguishes man‟s language from that of

other creatures is that man‟s language is grammatical. Grammar studies the

various characteristics which language displays. Oji (1988) observes that in

language teaching and learning, especially in a second language situation, the

knowledge of grammar is essential in the mastery of any given language.

Crystal (2004) however, sees grammar as the structural foundation of our

ability to express ourselves. The more we are aware of how it works the more

we can monitor the meaning and effectives of the way we and others use

language. It can help foster precision, detect ambiguity and exploit the richness

of expression available in English. It can help everyone, not only teachers of

16

English, but teachers of every subject, for all teaching is ultimately a matter of

coming to grips with meaning.

1.3 THE STATUS OF ENGLISH IN NIGERIA

English is a second language in Nigeria. English is a second language in

the sense that the users have their own indigenous languages but use English

mandatorily in official and public life because of the existence of a multilingual

nature of the country. Most of the African countries belong to these groups that

use English as their second language. Crystal (1985), one of the language

experts estimates that 1400 million people use English as a second language in

the world. Ogbuefi (2003) asserts that the existence of many apparently

unrelated languages in Nigeria makes it imperative for English to be adopted as

the official language in Nigerian environment.

From the time the English language is introduced in Nigeria, its

importance has continued to increase. Bambose (1971) remarks that of all the

heritages left in Nigeria by the British at the end of the colonial administration,

probably none is more important than the English language. Ukwuegbu et al

(2002) also comment on the importance of the English language. They maintain

that the perennial poor level of performance in the English language at the

senior school certificate examination (SSCE) and the University Matriculation

17

Examination (UME) has always been a cause of worry for the linguists. The

education failure is often an indication of language failure. What they are trying

to emphasize is that of all the subjects the candidates take in the Senior School

Certificate Examination, none is as crucial as the English Language. It is a

subject that candidates must pass if their overall success in the examination is to

have any value. Okoro (2003) expresses the same idea this way: For admission

into the university and other higher institutions, a credit pass in the English

Language is essential for any course of study in addition to satisfying the

relevant subject requirements in the chosen area. Use of English is a

compulsory paper at the University Matriculation Examination.

The importance of the English language is not only for the purpose of

education but also for commerce, mass media and as the language for

interethnic communication. An adequate knowledge of English is an

indispensible requirement for anyone who wishes to interact with other

different English speaking countries.

However, Wilking (1990:529), quoting Collinge, submits that it is not

possible to achieve a full competence in a second language situation. According

to him, a less than full competence should be the target of the second language

learner. In the same way, Ikara (1984:9) states that no matter how hard

18

Nigerians try, they cannot speak the English language exactly as the native

speakers of the language, just as no Englishman can speak a Nigerian language

as perfectly as a native speaker of that language. He goes further to say that our

study of English in Nigeria must take account of the socio-cultural condition of

the country.

From these, we can rightly conclude that, first, all the major functions of

language enumerated are performed in varying degrees by the English language

in Nigeria and secondly, the competence in the use of English is necessary for

any Nigerian who wishes to speak the language perfectly as the native speaker

of that language.

19

1.4 LANGUAGE ACQUISITION VERSUS LANGUAGE LEARNING

The two words „acquisition‟ and „learning‟ should be used to reflect the

situation between child language acquisition and adult language learning.

Acquisition is concerned with the question of how children acquire the

grammar of their native languages. It is the gradual development of ability in a

language by using it naturally in a communicative situation. One of the

questions which the acquisition theory seeks to answer is how and when do

children develop the initial grammar of the language they are acquiring and

what are the subsequent stages they go through in their grammatical

development. Krashen (1973) on his part sees acquisition as a sub-conscious

process which results in the knowledge of a language whereas learning results

only in knowing about the language. Children generally produce their first

recognizable word (e.g. mama or daddy) by the age of 12 months. For the next

six months or so, there is little apparent evidence of grammatical development

although the child‟s productive vocabulary typically increases by about three

words a month. This children‟s progress in their language acquisition is

determined by a biologically endowed language faculty for developing a

grammar on the basis of their linguistic experience. Chomsky (1972) notes that

children acquiring a language will observe people around them use the language

20

which they hear and the contexts in which the language is used. This experience

serves as the input in the child‟s language faculty which provides the child with

the grammar of the language being acquired. Radford (1998) quoting Chomsky

states the idea this way:

Whatever evidence we do have seems to me to support the

view that the ability to acquire and use language is a

species… specific… principles that determine the nature of

human language and are rooted in the specific character of

the human mind.

First, language acquisition has been described as natural, natural in the sense

that the strategies for its study are determined by the learner himself. They are

not imposed by any teacher. This process of learning is also referred to as

learning in an informal way.

Language learning on the other hand is the process of learning another

language after the first language (L1) has been acquired. This entails acquiring

a command of a language to the level that is adequate for the communication

purposes of the individual. This means among other things that the learner must

be understood and the members of the speech community must find his speech

acceptable. The process of learning in this situation is quite different from

21

acquiring a mother tongue. According to Obi (1966:47), this type of learning

implies a formal learning situation with a teacher in front of the class, with

feedback and error corrections, rules learning, and artificial environment that

introduces aspects of grammar one at a time. So learning in this situation is

learning in a conscious way.

Another important difference between language acquisition and second

language learning lies in the factor of time. A child acquiring a language is

constantly practicing it, day in and day out, for years, before he acquires the

natural mastery of the adult speaker. The time available for second language

learning on the other hand is measured in hours rather than years.

Some linguists maintain that child language acquisition and adult

language learning are virtually the same. Corder (1973:113), argues that as far

as child language acquisition and adult language learning are concerned, it is

the learner, teacher and the linguistic data in which learning takes place that are

different. He maintains that the process of learning something is not actually

different from the original learning process because the child‟s grammar

constantly changes and develops.

The concept of language universal is used to support the argument in

favour of the similarities between the two language developmental processes.

22

It is argued that with the knowledge of language universal already, a learner‟s

progress in any language, whether his native language or a foreign language,

learning is simply a re-play, a re-enactment or an adaptation of existing skills

and knowledge and not a relearning of any new skill.

Moreover, the two learners, the child acquiring a language and an adult

learning a language make use of rule formation. The child draws his hypothesis

from his native language to formulate rules. An adult language learner also

formulates rules from the data provided by the language he is learning.

1.5 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMS

The teaching of the English language in our schools is not very high. Not

only this: it would seem that they are actually becoming lower rather than

improving. The reason is that the teaching of grammar is de-emphasized not

minding the roles it plays in standard education. Grammar is a necessary

condition for the use and is the core of communicative competence. The general

ability to use language is predicted upon the knowledge of grammar of each

particular language. Moreover, the ability to produce and understand any

general and some specific text written in the English language depends solely

on knowledge of grammar. There can be no communicative competence

23

without grammatical competence. The knowledge of grammar is essential for a

competent use of language. Moreover, the teachers of English have been

increasingly abandoning the teaching of grammar at almost every level. In the

early days of teaching English, teachers tend to rely solely on initiation. In the

later years, it seems that they put their trust in God. Significantly, even those

who continue to teach „Grammar‟ of a sort often do so half-heartedly and with

mistaken ideas of what grammar ought to be. Based on this, many linguists

have been challenged to solve completely the staggering complexities of the

language.

1.6 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this research is not to apportion blames but to seek a way

of improving on the English language. Based on this, therefore the research

makes a comparative study of the roles of Traditional and Transformational

Generative Grammars in language description and analysis. This research

therefore evaluates the relative relevance of traditional and Transformational-

Generative Grammars to language teaching and learning with particular

reference to the English language.

The project will throw more light on the contributions and criticisms of

each grammar. Doing this will help us to know the contributions of each

24

grammar to the present–day English grammar and also increase our knowledge

of the language. The significance of this research is to create more awareness of

a grammar that is suitable for teaching and learning, as well as a method that

will embody the good aspects of other grammars that have existed before.

25

CHAPTER TWO

A REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 IMPORTANCE OF GRAMMAR IN LANGUAGE TEACHING

AND LEARNING

When we start to talk about „grammar‟, we have to be very carefully

indeed, because grammar is one of the many words in English which may have

very different meanings for different people according to their educational

background and experiences. It can also be used by same people with quite

different meanings on different occasions. Yule (1985:87) states that grammar

involves the study and analysis of the structures found in a language. Adejare

(1982:92) observes that „Grammar‟ is the basic of communicative competence

and anything that is appropriate in any context must necessarily be

grammatical. According to him, if there is no structure, there will exist no range

of meanings and there will be nothing from which to make choice which is

appropriate for the context.

Gimson (1980), quoting Wallis, says that communication is the heart and

soul of human experience and that communication processes include speaking,

listening and writing. According to him, nobody actually learns grammar to

26

learn his/her own mother tongue. It is a natural phenomenon that we start

speaking what everybody speaks around us. We gradually develop a better

sense of understanding with the passage of time when we come to learning a

new language like the English Language, we need to study its grammar. So the

importance of grammar cannot be neglected. Saussaure (1916), states that in the

lives of individuals and societies, language is a factor of greater importance

than any other thing. It is equally clear that the most revealing theory of

language is the one which follows the form of the grammar. Hodges and Kness

(1973) do not hide their feelings but argue that the grammar of language is its

theory of reality. So language and its grammar are inseparable.

Moreover, speaking on the importance of grammar in language teaching

and learning, Palmer (1971) advices also that the best way to define man is to

see him as a grammatical being. He states „„man is not merely homologues: he

is homo gramaticus‟‟ The core part of a language is its grammar. As such,

nobody can wish away the study of grammar nor gainsay its value in language

study.

In summary, we can all agree with Krashen (1987) that the study of the

structure of a language can have general educational advantages and values that

high schools and colleges may want to include in their language programmes.

27

2.2 AN EVALUATIVE STUDY OF TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR TO

LANGUAGE TEACHING AND LEARNING

The traditional grammar has been applauded for its knowledge of the

facts and rules of the language. Gimson (1980) remarks that traditional

grammar can be said to be the true precursors of modern scientific phonetician.

Cooper (1685) observes that traditional grammarians provide more specific

information about the pronunciation of English than is to be found in the work

of any other writer of this period. Dineen (1967) opines that traditional

grammar is basically Aristotlean towards the nature of language as exemplified

in the works of Ancient Greeks and Romans. Collinge (1990) notes that the

Traditional Grammar has been assumed to possess knowledge of facts and rules

of the language. He also states that the task of language teaching is then to find

the effective ways of transmitting this knowledge to learners so that they can

make use of it.

However, traditional approach has been questioned for many reasons.

Chomsky (1965) does not hide his feelings concerning inadequacies that

traditional grammarians are deficient in that they leave unexpressed many of the

basic regularities of the language.

28

2.3 AN EVALUATIVE STUDY OF TRANSFORMATIONAL-

GENERATIVE GRAMMAR TO LANGAUGE TEACHING AND

LEARNING

Transformational-Generative Grammar is a brain work of American

mathematician, Noam Chomsky. The structural view of language as a collection

of systematic patterns held away until the publication in 1957 of Syntactic

Structure by Noam Chomsky. Commenting on transformational approach,

Collinge (1990:521) points out that language is immanent in an individual and

that it is not so much conscious knowledge of facts and rules that renders

learning effective as the quality of the linguistic experience that the learner

undergoes. He emphatically states that in using the transformational approach,

great importance is attached to the learner‟s own language performance.

Talking of Chomsky‟s importance in today‟s study of linguistics and the

tremendous impact of his transformational generative grammar on language

study, Smith and Wilson (1979:10) observe that:

…we believe Chomsky‟s contribution has been as a system-

builder, who has constructed a complete picture of the

nature of language and of language user. It is in the

consistency and power of his overall framework, rather than

29

the individual arguments which makes it up, that we make

Chomsky‟s work revolutionary.

Roulet (1975:40) speaking along the same lines says that „„…the

transformational generative model appears as a synthesis of the most interesting

contributions of traditional and structural grammars‟‟.

On the other hand, Chomsky‟s Transformational-Generative Grammar

has attracted a lot of criticism. Some linguists doubt the possibility of

Transformational approach in helping students to improve grammatically, either

in writing or in speaking the language. In fact, some linguists argue that the

goal of Transformational approach is not pedagogical. Ubahakwe quoting

Oluikpe advances this argument as follows:

There are indeed, grammars not suited for the purposes of writing.

For instance, I am still to be convinced on how a competent

adequate grammar like Transformational-Generative Grammar can

help students write grammatically. Students have often asked me in

my lectures on Transformational-Generative Grammar how a

knowledge of phrase structure and Transformational rules can help

them to improve their use of English. I believe that the goal of

30

Transformational-Generative Grammar, although there are zealots

who are trying to make it so, is not pedagogical.

Concluding from the opinions of experts, it is established that different

approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, linguists should dwell more on

their collective strengths by adopting an eclectic approach to the study of

language.

2.4 THE THEORIES OF LANGUAGE LEARNING

There has been a great interest in the study of language by psychologists

and linguists. The various views are as follow.

2.4.1 BEHAVIOURIST APPROACH

The environmentalists posit that a child comes into this world without

any innate predisposition. The process of language learning according to them

can be explained in terms of conditioning. The child begins to hear during 1st

year of his life, a large number of speech sound produced by his parents.

Gradually, he learns to associate these sounds with the situations which

accompany them. For instance, the child learns to recognize the sound of

endearment which his mother produces when she feeds him. After sometimes,

these sounds become pleasurable in themselves even when they are not

31

accompanied by food. The more frequently the child is exposed to this process

of conditioning the stronger its effect. However, its strength of the association

bounds between the sounds and the situations accompanying them depends

upon the satisfaction which the child obtains from the conditioning process.

Before long, the child begins to imitate some of speech sounds that have

been heard from his parents. The child does so in an attempt to control the

environment and to invite the attention of his mother.

The implication of behaviourist view is that language is learnt only

through its practice. The more the learner is exposed to the use, the better the

chances of learning it. The production of language depends on the situation

which makes it use necessary. Language cannot be taught in divorce from

situation: the teacher has to introduce each new pattern of language in a

meaningful situation producing the correct linguistic response also requires

effort. The learner is not called upon to make this effort there is no learning.

Every new item learnt must be reinforced by further practice before further

learning begins.

32

2.4.2 THE NATIVIST VIEW

The Nativist perspective argues that humans are biologically

programmed to gain knowledge. The main theorist associated with this

perspective is Noam Chomsky. Chomsky proposes that all humans have a

language acquisition device (LAD). The LAD contains knowledge of

grammatical rules common to all languages. The LAD also allows children to

understand the rules of whatever language they are listening to. Chomsky also

develops the concepts of Transformational Grammars, surface and deep

structure. The child in this situation has the adult speech as a target he wants to

reach. He has his pre-disposition to speak language and his grammatical

competence that every native speaker of a language has the means of the end.

2.4.3 INTERACTIONIST VIEW

Interactionists posit that language development is both biological and

social. Interactionists argue that language learning is influenced by the desire of

children to communicate with others.

The interactionists maintain that children are born with a powerful brain

that mature slowly and predisposes them to acquire new understanding that they

are motivated to share with others. Shaffer et al (2002:362) citing Bates state

33

that interactionists focus on model of collaborative learning. Collaborative

learning is the idea that conversations with older people can help children both

cognitively and linguistically.

\2.5 METHODS OF LANGUAGE TEACHING AND LEARNING

Nwegbe (1982) explains that a good method of teaching has a lot to do in

determining the student‟s level of performance in the English language. He

therefore, advises that teacher‟s methodology should be motivating in order to

enhance students‟ learning and subsequent performance. Baldeh (1990) seems

to support the school of thought that believes that, the method used is the cause

of success or failure in language learning. In his words „„it is ultimately the

method that determines what and how of language instruction‟‟. On the other

hand Boadi et al (1981) disagree with the issue of method. They argue that one

of the weaknesses of some current training programmes of language teaching is

that perhaps too much emphasis have been placed on methods of teaching and

not enough on what is taught. They suggest that in language teaching, as in

anything else, a teacher‟s method should arise naturally out of his

understanding of the matter which he is to teach. Williams (1981) holds a

similar view. He objects to the idea of making method the only consideration in

34

language learning he „explains that the teacher who implements the method

should also be put into consideration. In his words.

„A method is no better than the teacher who is required to implement it.

The English teachers like the teacher of any other subject must have adequate

professional knowledge, competence, and experience if he is to function‟‟

On the other hand Craft (1980:50) submits that the ultimate success in

learning a language rests with the students regardless of the method or the

teacher. He advises that one of the ways that a teacher can facilitate learning is

by encouraging the students to develop a positive attitude about themselves and

about the target-language community. Ubahakwe (1979:13) concludes the

argument in these words. „It is therefore important that the relative effectiveness

of the methods be established since pupils‟ performance is affected by a good or

a bad method of language teaching‟‟

In summary the history of language teaching is endowed with chains of

methods. However, Mackey (1965) discusses fifteen methods used in one form

or the other but he does not hesitate to point out that there may be as many

methods as there are people to make them because of the vagueness and

inadequacy of concept of method. Nevertheless, in second language teaching,

there are some methods that are popular than others. The discussion of the

35

language teaching and learning methods should be based on the ones relevant to

language teaching and learning.

2.6.1 THE AUDIO LINGUAL METHOD

The need for audio-lingual arises from the scientific linguistic of

Bloomfield and his followers in the 1930s. According to Yule (1985) the

method involves a systematic presentation of the structures of the L2 moving

from the simple to the more complex, often in form of drill which the students

have to repeat. The emphasis is on everyday spoken conversation, with

particular attention being paid to natural pronunciation.

The psychological rationale for the audio-lingual method stems from

Skinner‟s behaviourist theory. Much of this practice involves hours spent in a

language laboratory repeating oral drill until the learners‟ response become

automatic. Rivers, 1985 quoting Yule submits that the method justifies the

claims that foreign-language learning is basically a mechanical process of habit

formation. On the contrary, Yule (1985:193) posits that it will be hard

nowadays to find a psychologist or a linguist who would agree with River‟s

statement, although versions of the method are still in use in language teaching.

Crystal (1985) criticizes the method for paying little or no attention to the

discussion of grammatical rules. In addition, Yule points out that the isolated

36

practice in drilling language pattern bears no resemblance to the interactional

nature of actual language use. He goes further to say that the method can be

incredibly boring.

Again, critics argue that since students are being taught to „parrot‟

patterns using the audio-lingual method they often times become very good at

doing that without really communicating or interacting. The implication of

this is that even if students learn the entire contact of audio-lingual courses,

they still need to learn how to use the language in a real-life situation.

2.6.2 GRAMMAR TRANSLATION METHOD

This method involves two components-study of grammatical rules and

vocabulary and the use of translation. Translation is believed to be the oldest

teaching method used in the Ancient Greece Rome and elsewhere in the ancient

world. According to Crystal (1987:374) the method is based on the meticulous

analysis of the written language in which translation exercise, reading

comprehension, and the imitation of written texts play a primary role. He

further points out that with the grammar translation method learning involves

the mastery of grammatical rules and memorization of long lists of literary

vocabulary related texts, which are chosen more for their prestigious reasons

rather than for their interest or level of linguistic difficulty.

37

However, Yule (1996:193) criticizes the method for laying to much

emphasis on learning about language rather than learning how to use a

language. Rivers (1968:17) observes that the method is not demanding on the

teacher and that whenever the teacher is tired, he can always set a written

exercise for the class. In fact, the teacher does not need to show much

imagination in planning his lessons since he follows the text book page by

page and exercise by exercise.

By the end of 18th century in Europe, grammar had become a full partner

in the method. The growth of the grammatical component continues to the

present-day. Rules are explained by the teacher and then they are memorized,

recited and applied by the students. The aims of the grammar aspect of this

method changed over the centuries in accordance with the emerging linguistic

theories and description. Despite the short comings of grammar translation

method, Crystal (1987) observes that a few expects still find the method

appealing.

2.6.3 DIRECT METHOD

This is developed as a reaction against the Grammar Translation method.

As with the natural method, it emphasizes the learning of speech by acquiring

meaning in environmental content and learning grammar through induction.

38

Crystal (1985) observes that no use is made of the learner‟s mother with this

method. Learners are encouraged to think in the foreign language and not to

translate into or out of it.

This method does not recognize the explicit formulation and teaching of

grammatical rules. The learner is encouraged to acquire grammatical structures

inductively by practising with complete and meaningful utterance. One of the

advantages of the method is that it emphasizes actual communication in

language, resulting inaccurate fluency. Nevertheless, Crystal (1987) points out

that the method is not an easy approach to be used in schools. He maintains that

due to the artificial environment of the classroom, it is difficult to generate

natural learning situation and to provide everyone with sufficient practice. This

method disappeared following the advent of the audio-lingual method.

2.6.4 THE ECLECTIC METHOD

Proponents of eclectic method hold the view that no one method is

complete in itself. Prator (1976) notes that a teacher can lean on any convenient

method or a combination of methods that helps him or her attain the objectives

of instruction, as no method has the whole answer. According to him, such a

method has all the advantages of flexibility and adaptability and also provides a

link between the old and the new methods. Wilkins (1990:521) quoting

39

Collinge has this to say, „„It is of course, perfectly possible to combine elements

from the different methodological traditions and no doubt, this is what often

happens in practice‟‟. Paulston (1974) categorically puts the same idea this way.

It will be interested if the three basic elements in teaching situation, that must

be reflected in any adequate teaching method. These elements include the

teacher, the subject matter, the learner and the aims of instruction. Therefore,

methods of language according to him should be based on at least three

cornerstones.

In addition, the eclectic method has been widely acclaimed because it

believes that there is an inter-disciplinary relationship which can create insights

in problem solving. Since the attainment of objectives is an overriding factor in

language learning, any tested technique can be a resource at the disposal of the

teacher. By using the eclectic method, the needs of the students rank uppermost.

So no teacher will foolishly continue to use a method does meet the needs of the

students. For according to Craft (1980) a „„Instructional methods are devised to

serve the needs of students: students are not devised as subjects to try out

methods on‟‟.

Nevertheless, critics believe that it is only when a teacher practices a

method that he or she can discover the inherent problems associated with the

40

method and then proffer solutions to the problem. For this reason, critics are of

the view that eclectic method encourages methodological prostitution.

In summary, there is no doubt that the eclectic method is constantly

looking for the best in every method in order to use it to achieve pedagogical

objectives which are viewed as an overriding factor. For this reason, it must be

encouraged and admired. Bedsides, most teachers claim to know all about the

eclectic method.

2.6.5 THE COMMUNICATIVE METHOD

The communicative method of language teaching has been introduced as

a result of the widespread reaction against the other methods of language

teaching. Critics argue that most of the methods stress the teaching of

grammatical forms and pay little or no attention to the way language is used in

everything situations.

Communicative method, therefore, focuses on the learners‟ knowledge of

the functions of language and on their ability to select appropriate kinds of

language for use in specific situations. Crystal (1987) writes that

communicative method, lessons are organized around concepts such as

requesting, thanking, complaining, persuasion, evaluation, instructing to

41

mention but a few. Every effort is geared towards enabling students to use the

language in a certain type of communication activity.

The communicative method has been applauded for its influential role in

language learning. The method reduces boredom and makes the class very

interesting. This stems form the fact that the students are free to express their

thoughts and ideas about topics under discussion.

In addition, the method has the possibility of integrating multiple

language skills, speaking, reading, writing and listening for the students. The

teacher can do this by asking the students to undertake exercises that will help

to inculcate those skills based on the topics under discussion.

On the contrary, Anyanwu (1990) observes that the method has its

shortcomings. He explains that the teacher may not know how to prevent

slippage in student‟s handling of morphological, syntactic and physiological

features and on falling back on native language habits. He goes further to say

that it may not be acceptable in junior classes. Finally, he explains that since the

communicative method lays emphasis on meanings rather than form, learners

may manage to get their meanings across even when the structures are ill

formed. This cannot make them competent users of the language.

42

CHAPTER THREE

TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR

3.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON TRADITIONAL

GRAMMAR

Traditional grammar otherwise called classical or Prescriptive is also

referred to by the term „normative grammar‟. The history of this grammar dates

back to Greek philosophers. The methodologies left by these philosophers and

grammarians continue to dominate the study of language throughout the

western world till the early 20th century. The ancient Greek philosophers

subsume the study of language under the general philosophical speculations

about man, the universe and metaphysic. Looking at how orderly the universe

apparently is, some of the Greek philosophers (Aristotle, Plato, the stoics etc)

feel that language must be God given and as such, must be logical. If language

is logical, therefore, it follows that names given to objects must of necessity be

their natural and logical names. Language could therefore be used to unlock

man‟s mysteries. Some other philosophers seeing the contradictions on

language opposed the theory of the divine-gift origin of language, but see

language as a matter of convention. However, Lyons (1968) opines that a

comprehensive history of traditional grammar is yet to be written may be true to

43

this date. To Lyons, an objective and historic view of the general term

traditional grammar is much richer and more diversified than as often suggested

in the cursory references made to it by modern linguistics.

What Greek philosophers who advocate a divine theory origin do is to

argue for the existence of a version of the Greek language that is pure, divine

and incorruptible. It is the function of the grammarians to find this perfect form

and write its grammar. The only way to get at it is through the great literary

masters in print, since they represent the only visible perfect form of the

language.

On contrary, Simpson (1994), disagrees with the view that language is

God given. He says that if language is God-given, there should have been

universal name for all the objects. On the contrary, names are given to objects

because people agree to call them by such names. It is on the basis of such an

argument that Plato classifies the Greek words into Onoma (noun) and Rhema

(verbs) Aristotle adds the third group Syndesmol (conjunction), the Stoics add

the article and Thrax increases the classification to eight. In addition, to

classifying the words into grammatical classes, the Greek grammarians

especially the stoics and Thrax identified tenses and agreement in verbs and

case forms for nouns. They also describe, classify and exemplify these.

44

When Greek civilization collapsed and was replaced by Rome in the 1st

century, Latin grammarians continued the mode of thought of Greek in the

matter concerning language. Latin texts and grammar are modeled after Greek.

Rome‟s influence is felt all over Europe including in matters of language so that

even when vernacular languages of such countries as England, France Germany

etc are written during the middle ages and after the Renaissance, they are still

using Latin as their model. They forced the syntax of these local languages into

the word of Latin, which essentially is normative and prescriptive. In the

English Language such names as Butler, Lowth are among the grammarians

who uphold Latin as their model and write prescriptive grammar.

3.2 THE ROLES OF TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR IN LANGUAGE

TEACHING AND LEARNING

The roles stated refer to the traditional grammarians‟ contributions to

language teaching and learning. Crystal (1980.356) sees traditional grammar as

the one, which refers to a set of attitudes, procedures and prescriptions. In the

same vein, Friend (1974:xi) maintains that the traditional grammarian is a

prescriptivism whose function is to present rules that underlie that form of

language considered prestigious and conventional by educated speakers and

writers. Crystal (1980) admits that several basic concepts of contemporary

45

grammatical analysis have their origin in traditional grammar. Task (1993:280)

adds that traditional grammar represents the fruit of more than two thousand

years of serious grammatical investigations. He adds that many of the

categories and analysis of traditional grammar have been incorporated with

only minor modification into current theories of grammar.

What then are those fundamental concepts from traditional grammar that

have been affected by minor modification? In other words, what has traditional

grammarians contributed to language teaching and learning? The answers are as

follows:

3.2.1 PARTS OF SPEECH

Traditional grammar makes use of the various parts of speech in its analysis. It

treats a „word‟ as a basic grammatical unit. A noun traditionally, is defined as

the name of a person, place, thing, state, activity or quality. A verb is defined as

doing word. An adjective, on the other hand, says something about the noun,

while an adverb qualifies a verb. These definitions are still being used in

teaching pupils in primary school as well as students in secondary schools.

Palmer (1971) argues that these definitions by traditional grammarians are

almost definitions in purely, grammatical terms as they should be, but they are

still not precise enough. On the contrary Oji (1988:3) posits that linguists now

46

define these parts of speech as words that take their inflections as shown in

those inflectional paradigms.

3.2.2 PHRASE AND CLAUSAL ANALYSIS

Traditional Grammarians also extend their study to phrasal and clausal

analysis. Traditionally, Phrase is defined as a unit of words that does not

constitute a finite verb. Traditional Grammarians teach that a clause is a group

of words that has a finite verb. Traditional grammarians classify clauses in two

kinds, namely the main clause and the subordinate clause.

Main Clause: The main clause resembles a sentence. It comprises the essential

parts of a sentence, the subject and predicate, and thus stands alone to convey a

complete meaning.

Subordinate Clause: The subordinate clause contains a subject and a predicate.

Unlike the main clause, a subordinate clause is introduced by subordinating

conjunction, and it can neither stand on its own nor make sense when

considered in isolation. However, Quick et al (1972:722) have modified the

definition of clauses to include the non-finite and verb less clauses.

47

3.2.3 SENTENCE ANALYSIS

Another contribution of traditional grammar is in the area of sentence

analysis. The way traditional grammarian analyses the various sentence types is

still in use. Traditional grammarians start their sentence analysis from word. For

them, word is the smallest meaningful unit of speech. They teach the

components of sentences by parsing of words in tabular form. First, it breaks

the grammatical unit into its constituent parts called subject and predicate.

While the subject consists of a noun, the predicate consists of a verb with one

object or more objects. It goes further to indicate the parts of speech to which

each belongs. It is essential for us to know that in parsing, the part of speech of

a particular word depends completely upon its grammatical function in that

sentence. This means that a single word may belong to different parts of speech

according to its use in a number of sentences or construction examples:

A. I will watch the ball (verb)

B. My watch is not good (noun).

3.2.4 TENSE AND ASPECTS

Traditional grammarians make a clear cut distinction between tense and

aspects. Traditional grammarians equate tense with time. According to Quick et

48

al (1972:84), English adopts two tenses only: the present and the past tense.

About the future tense, Quick et al (1972:84) argue that the future and modals

cannot be separated. So modals are used to show futurity in English. This does

not mean that English has a future tense comparable to present and past tense

conversely, aspect shows the beginning, duration, continuity and completion of

an action. Tense and aspect should, therefore, not be mistaken for each other.

3.2.4 CASE ANALYSIS

Case analysis is another area where traditional grammarians contributed

heavily. By case they refer to the form taken by a noun or pronoun in a

sentence to show the relationship between nouns or pronouns and other words

in a given sentence. The subjective case indicates that the noun acts as subject

of the verb. The objective case indicates that a noun can be used as one of the

following: the direct object of a verb, indirect object of a verb, and the object of

a preposition. Nouns that belong to possessive case indicate possession.

Students studying grammar can now evaluate more objectively the

argument of the traditional grammarians when they prescribe the rule: one

should say or write „it is I‟ and not „it is me‟. This is because the verb „be‟ is

followed by a subjective case in Latin and, not the objective case. One the

contrary, traditional grammarians have forgotten that the Latin rule is not

49

universal. In English, me is the educated informal norm. „I‟ is seen to be very

formal. But all the same, both forms are correct. However, some modifications

have been made in the case forms. Oji (1988:9) observes that it is only the

pronoun, through its various forms, that indicates the category of case in the

English Language.

3.2.5 TENSE AND ASPECT

Traditional grammarians make a clear cut distinction between tense and

aspects. Traditional grammarians equate tense with time. According to Quick et

al (1972:82), English adopts two tenses only: the present and the past tense.

About the future tense, Quick et al (1972: 84) argue that the future and modals

cannot be separated. So modals are used to show futurity in English. This does

not mean that English has a future tense comparable to present and past tense.

Conversely, aspect shows the beginning, duration, continuity and completion of

an action. Tense and aspect should, therefore, not be mistaken for each other.

3.2.6 MEANINGS

Traditional grammarians see meaning in terms of lexical or grammatical

meanings. Lexical meaning is the essential meaning of words classified as

major aprts of speech: nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs. Grammatical

50

meaning shows the relationship that exists between words that have lexical

meaning. Articles, prepositions and conjuctions are said to have grammatical

meanings. It should be noted that where only lexical meanings are accepted or

used, the message will be largely but not entirely clear. Words such as „a‟, „the‟,

„and‟, „with‟ are essential to the gramatically of the sentence. Friend (1974:xii)

adds that it is not to suggest that some classes of words have different functions

in the language. Using this as a base, today‟s English grammar has come to

analyze meaning in more objectives, systematic and scientific manner.

3.2.7 PHONOLOGY

Traditional grammarians also make a lot of contributions in the area of

phonology. Many nomenclatures that abide in our modern handbook on

phonology originated from the traditional school. They are the first that coin

and use them in their technical terms. Lyons (1968) in particular observes that

Roman grammarians attempt a definition of the scope of grammar as the act of

correct speech. They went as far as looking into the concept of symbols in the

classical languages.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica Vol. (14:282) the Greeks are

primarily responsible for the greatest phonetic invention of all time i.e. the

development of writing system (sound invention) in which syllables are

51

represented in terms of their component parts. Thus the realization that each

vowel and each consonant could be represented by a separate symbol makes it

possible to write any word that is said with inventory symbols.

Another thing to mark is the description of individual sounds that lay the

foundation of the distinction between vowels and consonants and the distinctive

features of sound segments. Also William Salisbury‟s (1547) Dictionary of

Englyske contributions are relevant today as the grammars of foreign languages

often make use of this approximate method of stimulated pronunciation.

Another contribution is that of 17th century traditionalist towards

comparative phonological analysis. There was awakening towards speech

analysis and language for their own sake during this period. Their

preoccupation with detailed analysis of speech activity, the comparative study

of the sounds of various languages, the classification of sounds types and the

establishment of systematic relationship between the English sounds made

considerable contributions to phonology. We also know from Dineen (1967)

that providing dictionary to give the meaning of difficult words and to stabilize

spelling also form part of traditional grammarian‟s contribution.

Moreover, traditional grammarians discover the lack of consistency in

spelling sound system of English words. The 16th century traditional

52

grammarians in Europe are initially concerned over the increasing inconsistency

of the relationships of Latin letters and sounds which they represent especially

in English. In their attempts to bring order into English spelling, they delved

into phonology. Their attempts contributed significantly to phonology,

especially in providing a universal system of sounds.

3.3 CRITICISMS LEVELLED AGAINST TRADITIONAL

GRAMMAR

Modern Linguists tend to criticize traditional grammar for some

weaknesses. Some of the criticisms against the traditional grammars are as

follows:

3.3.1 THE CRITICISM THAT TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR IS

PRESCRIPTIVE IN NATURE

Traditional grammar is normative and prescriptive rather than explicit and

descriptive. Its‟ rules are illogical, it is inconsistent and inadequate as a

description of actual language in use. Moreover in English, for a sample,

traditional grammarians prescribe on how words as „shall‟ and „will‟ should be

used. They condemn ending a sentence with a preposition in such sentences as

follows;

53

1. What did you do that for?

2. I have no money to buy the book with.

Yule (1985:72) observes that generations of English teachers have attempted to

instill in their pupils such prescriptive rules. The fact is that the existence of

prescriptive rules or students knowledge of them may not improve students‟

ability to communicate their thoughts and ideas effectively. Again, because

traditional grammarians start with definition they unconsciously assume that the

speaker knows the entire grammar of the language. Hence, they put the cat

before the horse.

3.3.2 PREFERENCE OF WRITTEN TO SPOKEN FORMS

Traditional grammar is also criticized because it gives priority to the written

form of language and ignores the importance of the spoken form. Leith

(1983:11) observes that the prestige attached to written variety is associated

with the belief that it is the most correct form and perhaps the most “beautiful”.

Jesperson (1954:4) quotes Queen Elizabeth to have written „dipe‟ for „deep‟,

„hiresay‟ for „hearsay‟ „nid‟ for „need‟, „spiche‟ for „speech‟, and „swit‟ for

„sweet‟. However, as the traditional grammarian envisaged, pronunciation

eventually changed and the written form remained unaltered. If one looks at the

54

silent „gh‟ in „height‟ „though‟ and „ought‟ one discovers that in their old

English forms, these words were pronounced with sounds were no longer

appeared in the phonological inventory of the modern English. In other words,

the „gh‟ has changed to /f/ as in „tough‟ and „cough‟. In brief, the correlation

between the spoken and the written form of a language is not often one to one.

For example, „knot‟, „knife‟, „island‟, „solemn‟, „wrestle‟, and „phenomena‟ to

mention these few words. This is not to say that the written form should be

separated from the spoken form or one should be preferred to the other.

3.3.3 FALSE NOTION ON SUPERIORITY OF SOME LANGUAGES

Traditional grammar is criticized for its‟ false notion that some languages are

superior to others and that the models of other languages should be based on the

superior ones. Traditional grammarians tend to forget that the language is

universal as well as dynamic. So, the idea of modeling English grammar after

Latin or Greek as inflectional languages may not work.

3.3.4 CRITICISM ON ABSENCE OF CONSISTENCE THEORY

Another criticism labeled against this grammar today, however, is the absence

of a standard and consistent comprehensive theoretical basis to explain

grammatical practices. Added to this, is the habit of using definitions and sub-

55

categorization. The definitions for example are inconsistent in English. A noun

is defined by what it is and pronoun by what it does (A noun is a name of any

person, place or thing, a pronoun is a word that performs the function of a noun

etc.).

Roulet (1975:3) observes that traditional grammar is also criticized for its

incompleteness. He illustrates this with a metaphor in a surgery. Traditional

grammarians are like a surgeon who can etherize and carefully open up and

dissect the patient, showing us every bone, arteries, nerves and cells in the

body, but cannot tell us the relationship existing between these intricate organs

and how, say, the actions of walking (which we see) is related to psychomotor,

co-ordination of muscle and the brain (deep structure) in a systematic way or

how food we have taken is converted into energy for working, speaking.

With all their contributions, traditional grammarians are unable to explain

- How a child of three to eight years could have mastered his language.

- How what we say is related to what we mean.

- How we can use limited linguistic rules and sound (phonemes) to create

novel sentences of infinite number and infinite length.

56

In summary therefore, we agree that although some of the features of traditional

grammar such as the use of vague and the notional definitions, insistence on the

written form of the language basing their grammar on the word as the basic

level of analysis, looking down on the spoken form of the language etc. have

proved unhelpful, or even misleading, still traditional grammarians have

provided a standard English that is acceptable by most speakers of the language.

57

CHAPTER FOUR

TRANSFORMATIONAL GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

4.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON TRANSFORMATIONAL

GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

Transformational - Generative Grammar is term used to refer to the

recent development in linguistics in America. The first type of Transformational

Generative Grammar in modern day linguistics was formulated by Zelling

Harris in 1951.

Chomsky himself was trained by the structuralist, Zelling Harris. But

Chomsky propounded a different and more comprehensive formulation after his

doctoral dissertation in the 50‟s. As a professor of modern language, he

elaborated his desertion into a book, Syntactic Structures, in which he attacked

both traditional and structural grammars for their inadequacies to account for

native speaker-hearer competence and the relationship existing between

competence (the native speaker‟s intuitive knowledge of the grammar of his

mother tongue), and performance (his actual language behaviour). For this

reason Chomsky‟s name is more closely associated with this grammar than with

any other linguist. Tomori (1976:65) adds that a different and a more

58

comprehensive formulation was propounded by Noam Chomsky in 1957 and

extensively revised in 1965.

Noam Chomsky (1957) maintains that the grammar of any language

should be one that accounts for native speaker/learner competence. Simply put,

given a limited number of symbols, and a set of finite rules operating in a

language, the native speaker should be able to generate an infinite set of

grammatical sentences by applying the rules over and over again.

The purpose of this chapter is to look at the roles Transformational

Generative Grammar plays in language description and analysis. Effort will be

made to highlight some of the criticisms leveled against Transformational

Generative Grammar.

4.2 THE ROLES OF TRANSFORMATIONAL-GENERATIVE

GRAMMAR IN LANGUAGE TEACHING AND LEARNING

4.2.1 DISTINCTION BETWEEN COMPETENCE AND

PERFORMANCE

One of the contributions of Transformational Generative Grammar in

language description is making a distinction between competence and

performance. Chomsky (1965:4) sees competence as the speaker‟s/hearer‟s

59

knowledge of his language while performance is the actual use of language in

concrete situations. He states that although the rules of the language are in the

brain of the native speaker, he may at times make mistakes in speech or writing

due to extra-linguistic factors such as stress.

Based on this, he advises that language learning should not only be

concerned with performance but also be interested in competence. An

interesting implication of this fact is that if grammars model competence, a

grammar of a language must tell you not only what you can say in the language,

but also what you cannot say, since native speaker competence includes not

only the ability to make the judgment that certain types of sentences are

grammatical, but also the ability to judge that others are not grammatical.

Therefore, his grammar is not as interested in speech or writing

(performance) of the native speaker like as intuitions which help in

interpretation of words, phrases and the sentences in their native language.

Chomsky believes that by studying the native speaker‟s usage, it is possible to

arrive at these underlying rules that guide the use of the language.

A simple way of seeing the distinction between competence and

performance is in our capacity to understand the meaning of word we have

never encountered before. For example, the expression multitangular tower

60

occurs in a widely used English text. It is an expression that people may have

never seen. Conversely, if the hearer knows the meaning of the prefix „multi‟

and the basic word formation rule in English, then, it is easier to understand that

multitangular tower is a tower having many sides, tower that is not a round or a

square one. This process of interpretation will not be possible unless there is an

underlying competence which can operate separately from the performance

feature of the language. Similarly, Hymens (1972) adds that competence should

not just consist of knowledge of rules for formulating grammatically correct

sentences. It should include the knowledge of when, what and where to speak.

This he calls communicative competence.

4.2.2 THE CONCEPTS OF DEEP AND SURFACE STRUCTURE

Transformational-Generative Grammar also posits the existence of deep

and surface structure form existing in any human language. This is reflected in

the native speaker/hearer‟s ability to understand and to produce novel

grammatical structures in his language and he is able to correct them. Chomsky

(1965) argues that structural description is too superficial because it only

describes the surface structure of the language and thus could not explain the

relationship of meaning which is quite clearly there but which is not realized in

the surface structure. The surface structure of a sentence does not reveal

61

everything we should know about a sentence. It is through the underlying

structure or the „deep‟ structure of a sentence that we get its full meaning.

Transformational grammar is known as psychological grammar because it tires

to find out what goes on in the mind of the native speaker. In the deep structure,

the apparently simple sentence such as, “The boy may have been killing a

goat”. This would in a very simplified term be like this in the deep structure.

The boy + singular +present

VP

NP

Mod Pro.

Perf.

. V NP

KIll a goat

Det

N No

may have +

++

en being goat

Aux

S

Tense

62

According to Chomsky (1965:16) the deep structure is abstract and deals

with meaning and the surface structure deals with the actual sounds (utterances)

in the language. The deep and surface structures are linked by linguistic

transformations capable of adding, detecting, changing, attaching, etc, one at a

time, until the surface structure is reached.

Chomsky (1957) accuses structural grammarians of being unable to

explain the difference between:

1. John is easy to please.

2. John is eager to please.

Using structural description, the sentences will indicate the same

relationship between the words in the sentences. Obviously, the relationship is

not the same. In the first sentence, John is the receiver of the pleasing, while in

the second sentence he is doing the pleasing.

4.2.3 THE CONCEPTS OF THE INNATE THEORY OF LANGUAGE

ACQUISITION

Another contribution of Transformational Generative Grammar to

language teaching and learning is in the innate theory of language acquisition.

Chomsky (1965:25) is of the view that a child is born with an innate ability to

63

acquire a language; this he calls the language Acquisition Device (LAD). It

means that the course of acquisition is determined by a biologically endowed

innate language faculty (or language acquisition program, to borrow a computer

software metaphor) within the brain, which provides children with a

(genetically transmitted) algorithm (i.e., set of procedures) for developing a

grammar, on the basis of their linguistic experience (i.e. on the basis of speech

input they receive).

Chomsky maintains that the language device takes primary linguistic

data as input and yields grammar as an output. He insists that all children

possess this language acquisition Device. He contradicted all the views of the

behaviourists by insisting that the human mind is not an empty slate to which

language is introduced for stimulation to which a response is expected to be

followed by a reward.

For Chomsky, language is not learnt because the leaner is subjected to

some conditioning process, but because the learner possesses imprints of

language in form of inborn capacity which permits him to acquire a language as

a normal maturational process. This capacity is universal in the sense that a

Chinese child has it as well as a Nigerian child. This is also referred to as the

inherited knowledge of the structure of natural language. The imprints or latent

64

structures of language are activated when a child is exposed to a linguistic

environment through listening. The usefulness of the innate theory for language

acquisition is that teachers of language are made to know how languages are

learnt. It is also intended as a model for the processes through which the human

mind constructs and understands sentences.

4.2.4 RESOLUTION OF AMBIGUITY

Transformational Generative Grammar is the only Grammar that has

provided a means of resolving structural ambiguity in a sentence through a

system of rules Crystal (1980: 17) makes a distinction between an ambiguous

sentence and a vague sentence. According to him, an ambiguous sentence is

analyzed as having more than one distinct structure. On the other hand a vague

sentence permits an unspecifiable range of possible interpretations. In

Transformational Generative Grammar, the resolution of ambiguity is not just

done on the “surface” as attempted by structural grammarian; rather, it involves

a much deeper analysis.

Chomsky (1965:21) illustrates with a few examples thus:

Flying planes can be dangerous.

65

He says that if this sentence is presented in an appropriately constructed

context, the listener will interpret it immediately in a unique way, and will fail

to detect the ambiguity. In fact, he may reject the second interpretation. What

Chomsky is saying is that two interpretations can be possible with this sentence

such as:

1. The act of flying planes can be dangerous (destructive).

2. Planes flying on the sky can be dangerous. Example 2,

I will visit the bank.

In analyzing this sentence, two distinct meanings are suggested.

1. I will pay a visit to a financial institution

2. I will pay a visit to bank of a river

66

The deep structure for the above sentence can be interpreted thus;

Tense

Present

Example 3:-

Sam loves you more than James.

This is ambiguous and has two different interpretations, which can be

interpreted as:

S

VP Aux NP

V NP

Det

wisit

N

I will the bank

N

67

1. Sam loves you more than James loves you.

2. Sam loves you more than Sam loves James.

Similarly, the identity of meaning between active and passive sentences is

explained by Transformational Generative Grammar. For example:

(a) The city bank has taken over ACME holding

(b) Acme holding has been taken over by the city bank

The first sentence is in active voice while the second sentence is in passive.

But the relationship of meanings within the two sentences is identical but in

structural description this cannot be shown structurally, they are different and

there is no way of indicating the identity of meaning since the surface structure

may not be always the same with the underlying meaning.

4.2.5 THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GRAMMATICAL AND

UNGRAMMATICAL SENTENCES

Transformational Generative Grammar has also contributed immensely

by differentiating between grammatical and ungrammatical sentences Chomsky

shows that grammatical and ungrammatical sentences could be defined in a

meaningful and useful way. Grammaticality is a function of syntax or surface

68

structure, well formed, while meaningfulness is a function of deep structure.

For Chomsky, a sentence is grammatically correct if it follows the rules of a

native-speaker‟s competence. It is possible for a sentence to be both

grammatical and meaningless, as in Chomsky‟s (1965) famous example.

„Colourless green ideas sleep furiously‟.

Here, this sentence is grammatically correct but meaningless. What

Chomsky is teaching is that a sentence can be grammatically correct without

necessarily being meaningful. As a result, it cannot be acceptable because it is

not semantically well formed. Let us look at these three sentences.

(SI) My five golden laughter‟s are strolling in the jiving clouds.

(S2) We comes to yours house yesterday.

(S3) Your to house come but.

S1 is grammatical but meaningless. S2 is ungrammatical but not

meaningless. S3 is ungrammatical and meaningless. Chomsky‟s work has a

great influence in the world of linguistics.

4.2.6 DISTINCTION BETWEEN L-AND E-LANGUAGE

69

Moreover, Chomsky proposes a distinction between L-language and E-

language, similar but not identical to competence and performance distinction.

L language refers to internal language and is contrasted with External language

(or E- language). L language is taken to be the object of study in linguistic

theory; it is the mentally represented linguistic knowledge that a native speaker

of a language has and is therefore, a mental object. E language encompasses all

other notions of what a language is; for example, that is a body of knowledge or

behavioral habits shared by a community.

4.3 CRITICISM LEVELLED AGAINST TRANSFORMATIONAL –

GENERATIVE GRAMMAR

Transformational-Generative Grammar has made a tremendous

contribution in the field of linguistics. The grammar has presented an overall

conception of the system of language which is more accurate and more

complete, yet not without some criticisms.

Transformational-Generative Grammar is criticized on the ground that it

causes confusion. Chomsky is accused of resorting to such abstract and

complex description that teachers ask themselves with some justification how

desirable, let alone possible, it is for them to apply such models of grammar to

the teaching of modern languages. Some teachers are frustrated by this

70

unprecedented shift in the theoretical wind which blows them in a variety of

directions, and are irritated by the grammatical models couched in abstract and

complex descriptions which their inadequate linguistic training prevents them

from understanding and evaluating.

Another criticism about its claims is that, while it may be true that every

human being is innately endowed with the capacity to learn and speak a natural

language Smith and Wilson (1979:26) insist that the grammar that a speaker

actually possesses will depend, at least in part, on the utterance he has heard

from the adult in the past-mainly as a child learning his language for the first

time.

Transformational-Generative Grammar is, however, criticized because it

studied language for its own sake and its use of logic and mathematical symbols

has pushed this schematization and abstraction to a point where the whole

theory loses touch with reality. In fact, because transformational – generative

grammar has pushed language study to abstraction, its analysis has generated a

lot of controversy. As Yule (1985:103) puts it, „unfortunately, almost

everything involved in the analysis of generative grammar remains

controversial‟.

71

Moreover, in spite of Chomsky‟s apparent format precision and his

claims for his theory, still the grammar is based on one hypothetical or actual

respondent or subject who supplies the data. Chomsky needs not any other

person than a native speaker of English to write his T.G. There are still doubts

as to who the native speaker-hearer of a language is. Based on this, it is

doubtful if a grammar based on one single subject is adequate to study grammar

as it has been shown how native speakers of the same language disagree on

many points of grammar and meanings in their language.

Moreover, Transformational-Generative Grammar is criticized for paying

less attention to performance. Chomsky posits that linguistic study should be

concerned with competence instead of performance. On the contrary, critics

doubt the possibility of studying language outside the actual language use.

Hymns (1972) also observes that “no theory of language (not just a theory of

Grammar)… needs to investigate directly outside the context of a “speech

situation”. He maintains that no matter how plausible an abstract theory of

language is, or can be, its success outside the closed circle of language will be

measured against how well it has provided a model for performance in every

day use of language and solving language problems. Language is used to give

information; it is used to make promises; people use language to threaten;

72

language is used to make excuses; users of a particular language use it to seek

information. Indeed, paying attention to competence alone may not make

people better users of the language, at least, in a second language situation.

In summary, we have seen how and why Transformational-Generative

Grammar came into existence and what has been said about it. Moreover,

73

transformational generative grammar has helped in language analysis and

its efforts in solving grammatical problems should not be over looked. It is true

that the grammar is criticized yet it has been demonstrated clearly that the

grammar has a lot of relevance to language teaching and learning.

74

CHAPTER FIVE

EVALUATION OF THE TWO GRAMMARS ON PEDAGOGIC

GROUND

5.1 EVALUATION OF TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR ON PEDAGOGIC

GROUND

The purpose of this chapter is to evaluate the two grammars used in the

study on pedagogic grounds. We should bear in mind that one of the good

qualities of a grammar meant to be used in teaching a Language in schools is

that it should be a grammar of performance, not an idealized grammar.

Traditional grammar starts its analysis of a sentence with a different parts

of speech. From there It moves to sentence components and finally to the

discussion of the sentences proper. Traditional Grammarian insists that „word‟

is the smallest meaningful grammatical unit. Description of English and Other

languages is based on the grammars of classical languages, Greeks and Latin.

These descriptions are based on analysis of the roles played by each word in the

sentence.

75

Languages are described in this way because the classical languages are

case-based languages, where the grammatical function of each word in the

sentence is made apparent by the use of appropriate inflections. Thus the form

of a word would change according to whether it is a subject, object, indirect

object and so on. The prestige of the old classical languages ensures the

survival of this form of description even after English has lost most of its case

markers and become a largely word-order based language. From the sketch

given of traditional grammar above, it looks as if this type of grammar has

nothing to offer us today. This is not true at all. Traditional grammar has given

useful ventures into many areas as to nature and functioning of language. For

example, their word-classifications are more or less still being used by language

teachers. Such terms as „noun‟, „verb‟, „noun phrase‟ „pronoun‟, „agreement‟,

„tense‟, aspect, „mood‟ etc are terms invented by the Traditionalists and still

form part of the metalanguage of linguistics. Chomsky (1965) realizes this fact

When he says that „within traditional linguistic theory… it is clearly understood

that one of the qualities that all languages have in common is their creative

aspect‟.

76

Moreover, traditional grammar continues to provide teachers with a

useful indirect source of guidance. Register analysis, for example, draws

heavily upon its terminology. Allen and Widdowson (1975) observe that:

Teachers who wish to maintain a balanced view of linguistics

should not overlook the fact that traditional grammar has many

useful virtues. The traditional handbooks provide an array of

terms and distinctions which most of us used in learning to talk

about our own language, and which people continue to find

serviceable throughout their lives.

Fillmore (1968) also adds that knowledge of classical description can still

deepen our knowledge of how language operates. Speaking on the same on

relevance of traditional grammar on pedagogy, Tomori (1977:6) quoting

Clobett, advises that to be able to choose words that ought to be employed, or to

be Placed where they ought to be placed, we must be very acquainted with

certain principles and rules. In the same way Crystal (1980:356) maintains that

traditional grammarians lay emphasis on correctness, linquistic purism and

literacy excellence. Traditional grammar has given useful ventures into the

nature and function of language. It has provided a Standard English that is

acceptable for most speakers. Its prescriptive nature makes it possible to be

77

understood by the greatest possible number of individuals. Croft (1980)

supports this idea when he says “traditional grammar is the best understood

method of discussing Indo-European languages which is not likely to be

replaced in the foreseeable future.

Considering what has been said about traditional grammar, it seems that

the grammar has been incorporated with only minor modifications into our

current theories of grammar. Chomsky (1965:194) has this to say of traditional

grammar “whatever evidence is available to day seems to me to show that by

and large the traditional views are basically correct so far as they go…..”

5.2 EVALUATION OF TRANSFORMATIONAL-GENERATIVE

GRAMMAR ON PEDAGOGIC GROUND

One of the good qualities of grammar is that the grammar must have a

quality that will be used in teaching a language in schools, so it must be a

grammar of performance. With this a language teacher ensures that his student

understands those areas that have practical value to them. On the contrary,

transformational-generative grammar is an explicit description of the implicit

knowledge of the native speaker. Its primary purpose is not to serve as a model

to guide the performance of anyone using a language. Moreover, according to

Herriot (1970:57) Chomsky himself has categorically stated that he has not

78

constructed a grammar of performance but that of competence in the following

words.

To avoid what has been a continuing misunderstanding, it is

perhaps worthwhile to reiterate that generative grammar is not a

model for a speaker or a hearer. Its attempt to characterize in the

most neutral possible terms the knowledge of the language that

provides the basis for actual use of language by a speaker/hearer.

Looking at these views, it is well understood that his intention is not to device a

pedagogic grammar. It can be observed that Chomsky has not made provisions

for a second language learner but bases his theory on a native speaker. In most

countries, the English language is being taught as a second language; Chomsky

posits that the intuition of a native speaker is adequate to describe a

grammatically correct sentence. But a second language leaner lacks such

ability. The second language learner needs to master the structures of the

English language before he can use the language effectively. It is clear

therefore, that Chomsky never considered the second language learner in the

theory of transformational-generative grammar. Though transformational-

generative grammar is not a pedagogic grammar, there are some aspects of it

that are relevant to language teaching and learning. There is no doubt that this

79

grammar can increase the awareness of language teachers about the nature of

language. This can be done by providing him with an insight into the nature of

grammar and hence the language by bringing him into the center of the picture.

The grammar has also been of tremendous help to the language teacher

by making available to him description of newly studied aspects of languageand

better analysis of more familiar areas.

Another aspect of transformational-generative grammar that is relevant to

language teaching and learning is that, with the knowledge of this grammar, a

language teacher becomes aware of how a child acquires language. Lewis

(1971:203) is of the view that one of the most revealing ideas expressed by

Chomsky in this area is that the linquistic development of a child is a process of

maturation and not imposition upon him of the form of the mother tongue by

the authority from above through conditioning, reinforcement or any other

means.

With the knowledge of this grammar, a language teacher is in a better

position to evaluate the language textbooks he is to use. He is also in a better

position to distinguish between those textbooks that are based on syntax and

are, therefore a matter of subjective judgement.

80

5.3 CONCLUSION

This project report will be concluded by rehearsing what has been achieved

in it. The report has made

us understand that when we come to learning a new language like English, we

need to study the grammar because the importance of grammar cannot be

neglected. we should also remember that the English language is learnt in

Nigeria as a second language. This is where the study of English grammar

comes into view. Moreover, we should know that we do not study grammar of

our own mother tongue, we have to study its grammar. Quirk (1972) observes

that there is a sharp difference between foreign language teaching (where one

certainly has to learn the grammar before being able to use the language) and

the teaching of English as a mother tongue (where the whole grammar has been

acquired before the teaching begins).

The project report has reviewed different methods of teaching grammar

so as to help the teachers of English as second language vary their methods.

Newton (1979) seems to show a trend toward eclecticism- that is, toward

choosing what appears to be the best form diverse sources, system or style. An

approach that is truly eclectic requires the teachers to know enough about the

81

various sources, systems, and the styles of teaching, to choose wisely between

what is good for their particular purposes and is not useful.

The project report has studied the traditional and transformational

generative grammars, the two grammars that have helped in teaching the

English language in Nigerian situations. We also noticed that each grammar has

its contributions and weakness. In this regard therefore, teachers of English

should be wise enough to vary their methods on every given situation. Again,

teachers who are knowledgeable in these values should be allowed to teach the

English Langauge.

In summary, this project has gone a long way by providing us with the

contributions of these two grammars. It is suggested that the method of

language analysis as presented by traditional grammar can be used as a teaching

model in primary, secondary and even in universities. The method of analysis

used in transformational-generative grammar can be taught to advanced

students of grammar in the universities. From the evaluations, it is clear that

these grammars have their strenghts and their weaknesses. In other words, each

of these grammars is as important as the other in language teaching. It is the

researcher‟s view that an eclectic approach in language teaching and learning,

as far as the two grammars are concerned should be considered.

82

WORKS CITED

Adetugbo, Abiodun, Nigerian English and Communicative Competence,

WASE Vol. XII No 1 p. 97. 1979.

Bamgbose, A. English Language in Nigeria. In J. Spencer (Ed) The English

Language in West African. London: Cambridge University Press, 1971.

Boadi, L.A. et al. Grammatical Structures and its Teaching. Ibadan: African

University Press, 2004.

Campbell, R. and Wales R. The Study of Language Acquisition. London:

Pengun, 1970.

Chomsky Noam. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: Mass, The MIT.

Press, 1965.

Corder, S.P. Error Analysis and Inter-Language. Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 1976.

Crystal, David. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. Cambridge

University Press, 1997.

Dineen, F. An Introduction to General Linguistics. Winston: Rinebsit 1967.

Hodge, R. and Kress, G. Language as Odeology (2nd ed) London: Routledge,

1973.

83

Hymes, D. towards Communicative Competence. Philadelphia: University of

Pennsyivania Press 1972.

Ikara, B A. English as a Communicative Medium and a Cultural Dilemma in

Nigeria‟ London: British Council and NESA 1984.

Krashen, Stephen D. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language

Learning. Prentice Hall International, 1988.

Loyons, John. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. Cambridge: Cup, 1980.

Obi, O. „Theories of Language and Language Learning Applied to J.S.S. Level

of English Language teaching and Learning‟.

Ogbuehi Cordelia. English as a Second Language in Nigeria: Magnet Nigeria

2003.

Oji, N. English Grammar for Advanced Students. Obosi: Pacific College Press,

1994.

Palmer, F. Grammar. London: Penguin, 1971.

Prator, C. In search of a method form: A Journal for the Teacher of English

course outside the United States. Vol.

Radford Andrew. Syntactic Theory and The Structure of English, Cambridge

University Press, USA 1997.

84

Roulet, E. Linguistic Theory, Linguistic Description and Language Teaching.)

London: Longman, 1975.

Saussure F. de. Cours de Linguistigue Generala Course in general Linguistics.

Trans, Peter Owen, 1960.

Tomori, S.H. The Morphology and Syntax of Present-day English: An

Introduction. Ibadan: Heineman Educational Books 1977.

Ubahakwe, E. The Teaching of English Studies; Readings for Colleges and

Universities. Ibadan: Ibadan University press 1979.

Ubahakwe, Ebo, Bookish English Among Nigerian Students, JNESA Vol 6 No

1. 1974.

Umaru, F.C. Issues in Applied English Linguistics Nsukka: Chika Educational

Publisher, 2005.

Widdowson, H.G. The Teaching of English as Communication ELT Documents

1 London: The British Council, 1972.

Wilkins, D.A. Linguistics and Language Teaching Oxford: Oxford University

Press 1978.

Yule, G. The Study of Language (2nd Edition) Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1885.