The empiricism of specific language functioning in the form of bilingual language contamination brings us back to the assumption of the existence of uniform internal metalanguage structures of verbal thinking. The Internal Form as a Language Structure Ever since Bertrand Russell, analytical philosophy has searched for an inner logical form of the sentence that could be true with respect to the world. Obviously, the superficial external grammatical form of sentences that we comprehend is a weak expression of the true form of corresponding facts. "Poor grammar" introduced many errors in traditional metaphysics disallowing distinctions available exclusively in the new logic. There is a need for a "philosophical grammar" — a grammar, because we speak about the form of the sentences, and philosophical because it should address not only the external but also the internal grammatical structures and reflect their interactions and transmutations thus revealing forms and elements that create the reality of true sentences.
Whats more is it is perfectly clear that hypercorrections stem from the fact that instead of understanding grammar the writer compensates by memorizing the components of grammar. The actual reason for the implementation of grammar rules which can be more accurately defined as; Applying
Then, the grammatical level, the word peer sometimes used as a verb and a noun. In order, other element will be added to meaning. Lastly, the collocational level, when the word peer is a parallel ,it obtains a further meaning (Gitsaki 1999). The stylization of lexicon has deemed as an integral elements of grammatical approach by Halliday, when he quoted by AL-zahrani(1998). He conducted that the concept of group seems as another scope of the collocability words.
However, this does not mean that the loss of debate is not a drawback, and he encourages teachers to try to compensate for the loss of dissent. Mill then turns to a fourth argument for freedom of opinion. He writes that in the case of conflicting doctrines, perhaps the most common case is that instead of one being true and one false, the truth is somewhere between them. Progress usually only substitutes one partial truth for another, the newer truth more suited to the needs of the times. Dissenting or heretical opinions often reflect the partial truths not recognized in popular opinion, and are valuable for bringing attention to a "fragment of wisdom."
The study conforms to the diachronic study – the study of the occurrence as it changes through time – by comparing the changes of language from the ancient into the present day. As a consequence of diachronic study, there are only correct and incorrect in using language since the traditional linguists try to prescribe the directions by sticking to the rules for the accurate use of the language. Therefore, using language that does not fit to the rules of universal grammar is unacceptable. The goal of traditional grammar method is to appreciate the aesthetics of the language not to communicate with each other. The traditional linguists concern about the usage of its ... ... middle of paper ... ... structure does not consider the meaning of representation which makes possible to the misunderstanding of sentences.
Of greater importance, Chomsky claimed, is the creation of a ‘competence grammar,’ a grammar reflecting ‘the fluent native speaker’s knowledge of the language”(Blackwell 96)Chomsky’s theory goes against Skinner’s theory of how language is learned . Skinner’s theory of Stimulus and response was seen as the appropriate during the 1940’s when language was seen as one dimension. Language comprehension orbited around Skinner’s school of thought of language being learned through memorization. However, Skinner failed to see over many elements attached to language like syntax, semantics, morphology, lexis, phonology and all those other features that Chomsky brought up. Chomsky’s theory was later proved by many assessments that took place in universities.
According to Huang (2007:2) "pragmatics as a modern branch of linguistics inquiry has its origin in the philosophy of language". Its philosophical root is traced back to the work of Charles Morris, Rudolf Carnal and Charles Peirce. Morris (1938) "distinguishes three distinct branches of inquiry: syntax, being the study of the formal relation of signs to one another, semantics, the study of the relations of signs to the object to which the signs are applicable.
There are various ways to use affixes. Affixes are an important building block of grammar, functioning to alter our perceptions of words and phrases. Two subcategories of affixes are prefixes and suffixes. 12. Prefixes and suffixes fall into the category of affixes; they are vital grammatical concepts, allowing us to determine meaning of a word or phrase in a sentence.
Conclusion In this paper I have elucidated some useful information about the verb phrase. For example, definitions of auxiliary, or helping, verbs, the verb phrase and the six main categories of English verbs, namely monotransitive, intransitive, ditransitive, intensive, complex-transitive, and prepositional. In my opinion. the most two similar types are the Ditransitive and the Complex- transitive, duo to both require 2 objects to be completed. I recommend to do the replacement way by replacing the 2 objects, and see the meaning if is it correct or not?
The linguistic theory of Chomsky has changed the long, traditional way of studying language. The nature of knowledge, which is closely tied to human knowledge in general, makes it a logical step for Chomsky to generalize his theory to the study of the relation between language and the world-in particular, the study of truth and reference. But his theory has been controversial and his proposal of "innate ideas" has been resisted by some empiricists who characterize him as rationalist. In our view, these empiricists make a mistake. In the present paper we attend to his position regarding linguistics as a science of mind/brain, which we believe is an important aspect of his theory that has not been paid enough attention or understood by his opponents.