CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO SYNTAX

Language has often been defined as the communication method used by

human that contains systematic correlation among certain types of oral/ graphic
forms. Each language has a stock of meaning-bearing elements and different ways of
how they combine words. How they combine words will make different meanings
although the sentences contain the same words. See the two sentences below:

a. Ali borrows a book from Aisyah.

b. Aisyah borrows a book from Ali.

Those sentences surely have the same meaning-bearing elements (see the fact that
they have the same words). But, because some words are put differently in them, they
have different meaning. These different combinations become the focus of syntax.

A. SYNTAX vs. GRAMMAR

The difference

Grammar is the set of structural rules which governs the composition of

words, phrases, and clauses in any given natural language. The set of governing rules
in a particular language is the grammar of that language. It can be said that every
language has its own distinct grammar. Grammar is a way of thinking about
knowledge. Grammar consists of set of rules regarding language and structure, such
as no splitting infinitives and no hanging prepositions (see the examples below).

He used to slowly walk.

What are you discussing about?
Syntax is how a sentence is worded and structured. Syntax, in Linguistics,
refers to the rules that govern the ways in which words are put together to form
phrases, clauses, and sentences. There are declarative, interrogative, exclamatory, and
imperative sentences in it. Besides, it also consists of word order (active and passive
voice) and length of sentences (short vs. long). .

Syntax has literary meaning and use, while Grammar shows good form. They
are two different things that can be easily confused. “Syntax is the study of the
principles and processes by which sentences are constructed in particular languages.
Syntactic investigation of a given language has as its goal the construction of a
grammar that can be viewed as a device of some sort for producing the sentences of
the language under analysis.” (Noam Chomsky, Syntactic Structures, 1971)
 Syntax is how we organize words structurally. Whether it is grammatically
correct or incorrect, it remains to be syntax. Sometimes, in a grammatical analysis,
linguists might refer to an „underlying syntax‟, which would be a normalized structure
of the words in a sentence, and not necessarily the actual structure used. The word
order „noun (subject)- verb- noun (object)‟ would be a simple example of syntax. The
order “Come here!” would be analyzed as having the explicit syntax „verb- adverb‟,
but might be analyzed as having the underlying syntax of „noun (subject)- verb-
adverb‟, as in “(„You‟- implied) come here”.

Grammar refers to the sets of rules that are used regarding HOW syntax
should be structured. This is typically divided into proscriptive grammar
(dictating/enforcing arbitrary rules for how to „correctly‟ organize a sentence) or
descriptive grammar (an analysis of how speakers ACTUALLY structure the
language). Some examples of grammar would be the rule “the verb should always
follow the subject”, or ” the „to‟ in an infinitive verb construction must always be
followed immediately by the verb”.

Grammar might also have a relatively larger scope, since it would include the
rules for any lexical variations (differences in spelling of the same base word), as well
as rules for capitalization, punctuation, etc. Syntax usually involves only the structure
of various TYPES of words in relation to one another (although some semantic
analyses might be more specific than others).

Syntax: The way in which words are put together to form phrases, clauses, or
sentences.

Grammar: the set of rules that explain how words are used in a language.

Grammar also is the framework of a language. It is a study or science that has

two parts: morphology (the forms of words) and syntax (the combination of words
into sentences). Syntax deals with their functions in sentences – subjects, objects,
attributes etc.

Example: “To know you is to love you.”

To know, to love are both verbs (infinitives) – (morphology)

But they have different functions: to know is the subject, to love is part of the
predicate – (syntax)

In short, syntax is how words are structured; grammar is why they are
structured that way.

The Similarity

While the term “grammar” is often used in the context of speaking about
syntax, the two are not coterminous. Syntax is the study of the rules and structures of
a language or languages as a branch of linguistics. Grammar is a set of rules in a given
language. So, to begin with syntax is descriptive (that is, it only observes the rules)
whereas grammar is prescriptive (that is, it sets the rules).

Additionally, syntax refers to the structure of how linguistic utterances (a

sentence, for example) are ordered which grammar might actually include. Grammar
could also include things like conjugations (different forms of verbs) and declensions
(different forms of nouns) which would be outside of the realm of syntax.

Grammar is a little more encompassing that syntax with respect to language.

Grammar also takes into account the way in which sentences should be read. For
example, recursive grammar is the application of an explanatory clause within a
matrix clause in a sentence. It is also interesting to note that syntax only refers to
organization about the horizontal axis; that is, how words are strung together to form
sentences. Organization about the vertical axis, or paradigmatic organization, refers to
the way in which words can be interchanged in a sentence. In English, which is a
word order language, one could say, “I love you.” It is also correct to say, “I love
him.” This is an example of paradigmatic organization.

Both grammar and syntax are usually focused at the level of words-in-
sentences (a level above pronunciation, a level below prose-style) but can spill over
into these and other subfields. Grammar and syntax are the knowledge of making a
good phrase, clause, and absolutely in making a correct sentence. Both of them are
very closely related. They are bound tightly in making a correct sentence.

Both “grammar” and “syntax” are used in a abstract way, and also to refer to
the structure of a single language, and in either case “syntax” is a subset of
“grammar”. In addition “grammar” is used in a different way, to mean the prescriptive
grammar of a language”.

B. DEFINING SYNTAX

Syntax is the study of the structure of phrases, clauses and sentences. In other words,
syntax is the study of how words are combined to produce sentences.

Syntax can thus be given the following characterization, taken from Matthews
(1982:1):

The term „syntax‟ is from the Ancient Greek syn - taxis, a verbal noun which literally
means „arrangement‟ or „setting out together‟. Traditionally, it refers to the branch of
grammar dealing with the ways in which words, with or without appropriate
inflections, are arranged to show connections of meaning within the sentence.

First and foremost, syntax deals with how sentences are constructed, and users of
human languages employ a striking variety of possible arrangements of the elements
in sentences. One of the most obvious yet important ways in which languages differ
is the order of the main elements in a sentence. In English, for example, the subject
comes before the verb and the direct object follows the verb. In Lakhota (a Siouan
language of North America), on the other hand, the subject and direct object both
precede the verb, while in Toba Batak (an Austronesian language of Indonesia), they
both follow the verb.

We drink milk every morning.

S V DO
Wicíŋcala kiŋ tewahíla.
DO S V
Mamake kacamata ibana.
V DO S

To make clear the meaning, of syntax, let us clarify three aspects involved.

1. Categories.
Words in a language are organised into different categories, or in traditional
terms, parts of speech. Categories may be lexical e.g. Nouns (N), Verbs (V),
Adjective (A), Prepositions (P), Adverbs (Adv) or non-lexical e.g.
Determiners (Det.), Auxiliaries (Aux.), Conjunctions (Conj), Degree words
(Deg) or Phrasals e.g. Noun phrases, Verb phrases, Adjective phrases,
Preposition(al) phrases, Adverb phrases. The theory is that every phrasal
category contains at least one lexical category of the same basic type. For
example, every NP contains at least a N; every VP contains at least a V and so
on. Conversely, every lexical category belongs to a phrasal category of the
same basic type: every N belong to a NP, and so on.
2. Phrase structure.
Phrase structure is the division of a sentence into part, or constituents, and the
division of those constituents into subparts. For instance, the sentence The
bear went over the mountain is made up of two main constituents: The bear
and went over the mountain. The second constituent is, in turn divided into
two parts, went and over the mountain, which is divided even further, into
over and the mountain. All sentences have such hierarchical structure, even a
very simple two-word sentence like Carol giggled. The elements
(constituents) in a phrase structure are governed by phrase structure (PS) rules
which specify the left - to - right ordering of elements, whether the elements
ate optional or obligatory.
We have some P.S rules:
S = NP + VP
VP = V + NP
V + PP
V + NP + NP
NP = Art + N + (PP)
Det + N
Adj + N
PP = Pre + N
Elements in the sentences ate governed not only by categories and constituent
structure but also by subcategorization. Subcategorization means the
classification of words in terms of their complements option.
Subcategorization interacts with the PS rules to ensure that lexical items
appear in the appropriate types of structures.
For example:
The verb “arrive” requites no complements
E.g. He‟s arrived.
The verb “become” needs an adjective or a noun as complements
E.g. He‟s become an engineer.
The adjective “tall” does not need a complement.
E.g. He is tall.
The adjective “interested” requires a PP.
E.g. He is interested in music
There are four ways to determine phrase structures:
One approach to determining phrase structure is substitution test: Whatever
you can substitute a single word for, preserving grammaticality is a constituent
or phrase, that is, a “chunk” and whatever cannot be substituted for is not. In
The bear went over the mountain, we can easily find one-word substitutions
for the bear. As a result, we can have new sentences like Max went over the
mountain, He went over the mountain, Tigers went over the mountain. The
substitution need not preserve meaning, just grammatical sentence. The new
sentences created by the substitution for The bear meet the test, so we can
conclude that in the original sentence The bear is a constituent.

Now let's look at some other word sequences in the bear went over the
mountain. How about bear went? There don't seem to be any single-word
substitutions for it. The results of substitutions such as smoke, green, it for
bear went aren't grammatical sentences; and since no substitution seems
possible for bear went, we can conclude that it isn't a constituent in the bear
went over the mountain. Constituents can he longer than two words. For went
over the mountain in the bear went over the mountain we can substitute any
single intransitive verb or any transitive verb whose direct object can be
optionally omitted: The bear slept, The bear awoke, The bear ate.
A second criterion for finding constituents is the ability of constituents to
“move”. For example, “The bear went over the mountain” we can move “over
the mountain” to the front position in the sentence: Over the mountain the bear
went. We can move a word sequence in a different place. Note that the
movement criterion, since it relies in paraphrase, requires keeping the meaning
the same, unlike the substitution criterion.
A third test for “constituency” is whether the word sequence in question can
be conjoined with a similar sequence. In The bear went over the mountain, all
constituency” can be:
a. The bear and the mouse went over the mountain.
b. The bear went over the mountain and came back again.
c. The bear went over the mountain and cross the lake.
d. The bear went over the mountain and the pass.

A final criterion for “constituency” is whether the sequence in question can be

the antecedent for a pro-word (i.e., a pronoun or a word with a similar
function), it seems to be generally true that pro-forms can only use
constituents for their antecedents, never non-constituents. The technical term
for the relation between a pro-word (or more generally, pro-expression) and its
antecedent is anaphora. All the constituents in

The bear went over the mountain can be justified under the anaphora test:
a. The bear went over the mountain. He was hungry.
b. The bear went over the mountain. He did so in order to see what was on
the other side.
c. The bear went over the mountain. He went there because he had a strong
drive to conquer new challenges.
d. The bear went over the mountain. In fact, he went back and forth over it
several times before he got tired of the scenery.
3. Transformation.
According to many linguists, a complete account of the syntactic structure of
sentences must include the concepts of transformation. A transformation is an
operation that moves a phrasal category (e.g. NP, VP, PP) from one location to
another within a structure. For example, the formation of question structure
requires a transformation - that is inversion.
E.g. The cat can climb the tree.
Can the cat climb the tree?
The transformational analysis is claiming that there are 2 levels of syntactic
structure.
The first, called Deep structure is formed by the PS rules in accordance with
the head‟s subcategorization properties. Deep structure plays a special role in
the interpretation of sentences. Deep structure or base component produces /
generates basic syntactic structures. The second, called Surface structure,
results from applying whatever transformation are appropriate for the sentence
in questions. Surface structure/ transformational component changes/
transform basic structures into sentences. We can illustrate the above
mentioned concept with the diagram:
 Phrase structure rules.

Deep structure (Subcategorization restricts choice of complement)

Transformations

Surface structure

For example, the sentence: What did the boy see? Has two syntactic structures;

It should be noticed that only constituents can be questioned and moved.

E.g. (a) Did he climb {up the ladder}?

PP
 (b) Where did he climb { }?

(c) Did he {fold up} {the ladder}?

NP
In (c) “up the ladder” is not a constituent and thus cannot be questioned or moved?

(d) Where did he {fold} { }?

wrong NP