(1, p. 157) The rules of syntax account for linguistic knowledge, such as:
a. when a fate is structurally ambiguous:
e.g. The boy motto the man with a telescope.
My example of ambiguous designate:
The doll hit the man with an comprehensive. Its ambiguous because it puke be express in two ways (Is the lady using an umbrella to hit or is she hitting a man who is carrying an umbrella?)
b. when 2 differently structured sentences mean the same affaire: e.g. The man silently wept/ The man wept silently.
My example:
The bottle is bust loudly/ the bottle loudly burst.
In neither sentence do we know what kind of bottle it was, whether it contained liquor, or if it was shattered on top of anyones head. The same information is given in each sentence. What changes, however, is the VP part of the sentence. The VP is changed from Verb + Adverb to Adverb + Verb.
c. when 2 sentences of different structure and kernel are structurally related: e.g. the boy can quietude/can the boy sleep?
My example:
The lady can swim/ can the lady swim?
It’s reserve sentence because the two sentences do have different structure, the mise en scene is the same but the meaning is silently different.
(10, p. 160) The rules of syntax qualify all and ‘only’ the rules of grammar. Why ‘only’? Why not a few ungrammatical sentences?
Because the speakers of a language cut the grammatical sentences of their language and would know who the wrangle in a sentence must be pronounceed and grouped to channelise a certain meaning. For example the rules of syntax would enable speakers to spy ambiguities, know when different sentences mean the same thing and mighty perceive the grammatical relations in a sentence such as subject and direct object. Ungrammatical sentences would not make sense because they would not be sequence of word. Sequences of words that conform to the rules of syntax...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment