Editing Generative grammar (section)

== History ==

Analytical models based on semantics and [[discourse]] [[pragmatics]] were rejected by the [[Bloomfieldian]] school of linguistics<ref name=Garvin_1954>{{cite journal |last=Garvin | first=Paul L.|title=Prolegomena to a Theory of Language by Louis Hjelmslev; Francis J. Whitfield |year=1954|journal=Language |volume=30 |issue=1 |pages=69–96 |doi=10.2307/410221| jstor=410221}}</ref> whose derivatives place the [[object (grammar)|object]] into the [[verb phrase]], following from [[Wilhelm Wundt]]'s [[Völkerpsychologie]]. Formalisms based on this convention were constructed in the 1950s by [[Zellig Harris]] and [[Charles Hockett]]. These gave rise to modern generative grammar.<ref name=Seuren_1998>{{cite book|author=Seuren, Pieter A. M. |authorlink = Pieter Seuren |year=1998|title=Western linguistics: An historical introduction|publisher=Wiley-Blackwell|isbn=0-631-20891-7|pages=160–167}}</ref>

As a distinct research tradition, generative grammar began in the late 1950s with the work of [[Noam Chomsky]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Newmeyer|first=Frederick|year=1986|title=Linguistic Theory in America|publisher=Academic Press|pages=17-18|isbn=0-12-517152-8}}</ref> However, its roots include earlier [[Structuralism|structuralist]] approaches such as [[glossematics]] which themselves had older roots, for instance in the work of the ancient Indian grammarian [[Pāṇini]].<ref name="Koerner_1978">{{cite book|last=Koerner|first=E. F. K.|title=Toward a Historiography of Linguistics: Selected Essays|publisher=John Benjamins|date=1978|pages=21–54|chapter=Towards a historiography of linguistics}}</ref><ref>Bloomfield, Leonard, 1929, 274; cited in Rogers, David, 1987, 88</ref><ref>Hockett, Charles, 1987, 41</ref> Military funding to generative research was an important factor in its early spread in the 1960s.<ref>Newmeyer, F. J. (1986). Has there been a 'Chomskyan revolution' in linguistics?. Language, 62(1), p.13</ref>

The initial version of generative syntax was called [[transformational grammar]]. In transformational grammar, rules called transformations mapped a level of representation called [[deep structure]]s to another level of representation called surface structure. The semantic interpretation of a sentence was represented by its deep structure, while the surface structure provided its pronunciation. For example, an active sentence such as "The doctor examined the patient" and "The patient was examined by the doctor", had the same deep structure. The difference in surface structures arises from the application of the passivization transformation, which was assumed to not affect meaning. This assumption was challenged in the 1960s by the discovery of examples such as "Everyone in the room knows two languages" and "Two languages are known by everyone in the room".<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Heitner |first=Reese |date=2003-10-03 |title=An Integrated Theory of Linguistic Descriptions [1964] |url=https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9191.00147 |journal=The Philosophical Forum |volume=34 |issue=3-4 |pages=401–416 |doi=10.1111/1467-9191.00147 |issn=0031-806X|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

After the [[Linguistics wars]] of the late 1960s and early 1970s, Chomsky developed a revised model of syntax called [[Government and binding theory]], which eventually grew into [[Minimalist program|Minimalism]]. In the aftermath of those disputes, a variety of other generative models of syntax were proposed including [[relational grammar]], [[Lexical Functional Grammar|Lexical-functional grammar]] (LFG), and [[Head-driven phrase structure grammar]] (HPSG).<ref>{{Citation |last=Sadler |first=Louisa |title=Morphology in Lexical-Functional Grammar and Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar |date=2018-12-13 |work=The Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory |pages=211–243 |editor-last=Audring |editor-first=Jenny |url=https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34505/chapter/292751429 |access-date=2025-05-08 |publisher=Oxford University Press |language=en |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199668984.013.17 |isbn=978-0-19-966898-4 |last2=Nordlinger |first2=Rachel |editor2-last=Masini |editor2-first=Francesca|url-access=subscription }}</ref> 

Generative phonology originally focused on [[rewriting|rewrite rules]], in a system commonly known as ''SPE Phonology'' after the 1968 book [[The Sound Pattern of English]] by Chomsky and [[Morris Halle]]. In the 1990s, this approach was largely replaced by [[Optimality theory]], which was able to capture generalizations called [[conspiracy (phonology)|conspiracies]] which needed to be stipulated in SPE phonology.<ref name ="McCarthyOT"/>

Semantics emerged as a subfield of generative linguistics during the late 1970s, with the pioneering work of [[Richard Montague]]. Montague proposed a system called [[Montague grammar]] which consisted of interpretation rules mapping expressions from a bespoke model of syntax to formulas of [[intensional logic]]. Subsequent work by [[Barbara Partee]], [[Irene Heim]], [[Tanya Reinhart]], and others showed that the key insights of Montague Grammar could be incorporated into more syntactically plausible systems.<ref name="parteebaltic">{{cite journal|last1=Partee|first1=Barbara|year=2011|title=Formal semantics: Origins, issues, early impact.|journal=The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication|volume=6|citeseerx=10.1.1.826.5720}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last1=Crnič|first1=Luka|last2=Pesetsky|first2=David|last3=Sauerland|first3=Uli|editor-last1= Crnič|editor-first1= Luka|editor-last2=Sauerland|editor-first2=Uli|encyclopedia=The art and craft of semantics: A Festschrift for Irene Heim|title=Introduction: Biographical Notes |url=https://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/jZiNmM4N/CrnicPesetskySauerland.pdf|year=2014}}</ref>