Lecture 5

Structure and System

Chomsky defined language as" a set (finite or
infinite) of sentences, each finite in length and
constructed out of a finite set of elements".
• Language systems are theoretical constructs, postulated by the linguist in order to
account for such regularities as he finds in the language-behavior of the members of
particular language-communities.

• Language systems cannot be identified (equated) with real natural languages

• Real natural languages are neither stable nor homogeneous (similar). However, there are
sufficient stability and homogeneity in the speech of the speakers of one language.
• Natural languages can be a spoken or written one.
• Natural language has the property of medium-transferability. This means any sentence of
the written language can be put into correspondence with a sentence of the spoken
language and vice versa.
• Thus, written and spoken English are ‘isomorphic’. They are isomorphic because they
have the same structure. In other words, they have the same language system.
• Therefore, language system is independent of the medium.
• Language system is a purely abstract structure.
• Language-systems has the property of duality (having two parts). In other words,
language-systems is a two-level structure. For example, spoken sentences are not just
combinations of phonological elements; they are also combinations of syntactic units.

• These levels are independent: the phonological structure of a language is not determined
by its syntactic structure and its syntactic structure is not determined by its phonological
structure.
• As a result of the independence of phonological and syntactic structure, the same
combination of elements (sounds in speech and letters in writing) can be realized not one,
but two or more, sentences.
• The sentences may be distinguished one from another by intonation or punctuation, as:
1. John says Peter has been here all the time
2. John, says Peter, has been here all the time

• Even without differences of intonation or punctuation the same combination of elements

can realize more than one sentence. This can be done by assigning syntactic units to what
it called parts of speech. For example,
1. We watched her box.
• The syntactic units, unlike the phonological elements, are very numerous.
• Both the phonological elements and syntactic units are finite in number.
• Every language-system consists of a finite set of phonological elements and a finite set of syntactic
units. These elements and units are interrelated by a set of rules. These combinations of elements or
units are sentences.
• Every sentence is well-formed both phonologically and syntactically. However, well-formedness
must not be confused with acceptability, potentially for use or even meaningfulness.
• Thus, any combination of elements or units of a given language which is not well-formed in terms of
the rules of the language is ill-formed.
• Ill-formed combinations may be marked with asterisk *
• *He weren’t doing nothing.
• This example is ill-formed with respect to Standard English. However, it is well-formed
in certain non-standard dialects of English.

• This illustrates the more general point that different languages may be constructed out of
the same elements and units, what is well-formed in one language being ill-formed with
respect to another language.
• We began by accepting Chomsky’s definition of a language (i.e., a language system) as a
set of sentences.

• However, it is preferable to think of a language-system as being composed of an

elements, units and the rules which determine the well-formedness of sentences on both
levels.
 Clarify this statement:
Even without differences in intonation or
punctuation, the same combination of elements can
TASK realize more than one sentence, as:
• 1. Visiting relatives can be boring.
• 2. The chicken is ready to eat.