The Comparison and Contrast Between Chomsky Transformational-Generative Linguistics and Halliday Systemic Functional Linguistics
The Comparison and Contrast Between Chomsky Transformational-Generative Linguistics and Halliday Systemic Functional Linguistics Abstract As two of cornerstones constructing the modern linguistic theories, the transformational generative linguistics represented by Noam Chomsky and the systemic functional linguistics featured by Michael Halliday have always been deemed as two most influential and pivotal roles in the modern linguistic academic fields. However, they distinct each other in many respects while virtually making the same impacts. Based on this, this paper probes into discussing the comparison and contrast between these two linguistics systems.
Key words: transformational, functional, linguistics, comparison
Introduction
Prior to unfold the compassion, personally, I am continuing to appreciate that generative and systemic functional grammars persist as “non-overlapping magisteria.” Since they are not dichotomous or contrary, it should be accepted that it’s helpful to simply define one in terms of what the other is not, if we want to safely conclude one is advantageous than the other, there must be a criteria or purpose relating to it. Nevertheless, the primary function of language is communication, if for this purpose, we must doubt that which theory is more applicable when users actually produce or understand language. It is widely believed that, in the kind of society we live in, context is an important element we have to take into consideration in language study for the moment we understand the human language. And thus we admit that systemic functional grammar is more developed from TG grammar and has more advantages in terms of helping us use language, understand meanings and analyze discourses. In my observation, there are at least six differences between systemic functional grammar and TG grammar as follows. 1. TG grammar is the linguistic version that has been mostly influenced by and developed upon
Key words: transformational, functional, linguistics, comparison
Introduction
Prior to unfold the compassion, personally, I am continuing to appreciate that generative and systemic functional grammars persist as “non-overlapping magisteria.” Since they are not dichotomous or contrary, it should be accepted that it’s helpful to simply define one in terms of what the other is not, if we want to safely conclude one is advantageous than the other, there must be a criteria or purpose relating to it. Nevertheless, the primary function of language is communication, if for this purpose, we must doubt that which theory is more applicable when users actually produce or understand language. It is widely believed that, in the kind of society we live in, context is an important element we have to take into consideration in language study for the moment we understand the human language. And thus we admit that systemic functional grammar is more developed from TG grammar and has more advantages in terms of helping us use language, understand meanings and analyze discourses. In my observation, there are at least six differences between systemic functional grammar and TG grammar as follows. 1. TG grammar is the linguistic version that has been mostly influenced by and developed upon