Syntax

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  Syntax decides whether the dog bit the man sounds like ordinary English or like nonsense once its words get rearranged, and different languages draw that line in wildly different places. Somewhere among the six possible orders of subject, verb, and object, most languages settle on just one or two as natural, while a rare few show no clear preference at all. Syntax names the branch of linguistics that studies this kind of pattern: how words and morphemes combine into well-formed phrases and sentences. What makes one arrangement of words grammatical and another word salad, and how has the search for an answer split linguists into competing schools for centuries?

• 2. Word Order, Relations, and Constituents

  ›

  Over 85 percent of the world's languages place the subject first, in either SVO or SOV order, and the remaining logical possibilities, VSO, VOS, OVS, and OSV, exist too, with the last three being rare; some languages have no single dominant order for subject, verb, and object at all. In most generative theories, these surface arrangements arise from a more complex underlying clause structure, with word order sometimes reflecting a sentence's meaning or function rather than a fixed rule. Grammatical relations describe how elements behave toward one another within what linguists call the morphosyntactic alignment of a language, covering phenomena such as transitivity, passivization, and how a verb marks agreement with its arguments. Different languages apply different tests for identifying a subject; for instance, whether a noun phrase can be referred back to from a relative clause, or whether it can be shared across clauses, may vary from one language to another. A third core concept, constituency, describes how words group together into units, or phrases, that behave as single blocks: constituents tend to move together and can serve as the domain over which agreement operates. Some languages allow discontinuous phrases, splitting a single constituent apart with other material in between, and constituents themselves can be recursive, nesting other constituents of the same type inside them.

• 3. From Ancient India to Port-Royal

  ›

  The word syntax traces back to the ancient Greek syntaxis, built from syn-, meaning together, and taxis, meaning arrangement, and it picked up its modern, grammar-specific sense in Hellenistic Greek. The English word first appeared in 1548, arriving partly through the Latin syntaxis, which had itself developed from the Greek term. Long before that English coinage, Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī, written in Ancient India around the 4th century BC, approached a level of grammatical sophistication that scholars still cite as anticipating modern syntactic theory. In the West, the tradition later called traditional grammar began with Dionysius Thrax. In 1660, Antoine Arnauld and Claude Lancelot published a book that launched the framework known as grammaire générale, built on the assumption that language directly mirrors human thought and that a single, most natural way exists to express any given idea; the closely related Port-Royal grammar modeled sentence structure on logic itself, analyzing every sentence as a subject, a copula, and a predicate, and that logic-based approach was adopted even by early comparative linguists such as Franz Bopp. That confidence broke down in the 19th century, as the rise of historical-comparative linguistics revealed just how diverse human languages actually are, undermining the assumption that any single natural or logical sentence structure exists. Syntax did not become central to theoretical linguistics until the 20th century, a period substantial enough in its output that some scholars have called it the century of syntactic theory, a history surveyed in detail by Giorgio Graffi in 2001.

• 4. Dependency and Categorial Grammars

  ›

  Dependency grammar treats the finite verb as the root of an entire clause, with every other word attached to it through directed links called dependencies, rather than organizing sentences around the constituency relationships used in phrase-structure grammars. Linguist Lucien Tesnière, who lived from 1893 to 1954, is widely regarded as the father of dependency-based syntax; he rejected the standard division of a clause into subject and predicate that dominated the grammars of his time, positioning the verb instead as the structural root of the whole clause. Several later frameworks built on his approach, including recursive categorical syntax, functional generative description, meaning-text theory, operator grammar, and word grammar. Categorial grammar takes a different route, treating constituents as functions and arguments that combine according to rules built into their syntactic categories; a transitive verb, for instance, is represented as a formula requiring two noun phrases, its subject and its object, in order to produce a complete sentence. Tree-adjoining grammar extends this categorial approach by adding partial tree structures into the categories themselves. A separate strand of theories, called stochastic or probabilistic grammars, models syntax using probability theory, often implemented through neural networks or connectionist systems.

• 5. The Generative Revolution and Beyond

  ›

  Functionalist grammars study how sentence form connects to communicative function, an approach represented by frameworks including functional discourse grammar, the Prague linguistic circle, role and reference grammar, and systemic functional grammar. Generative syntax, by contrast, tries to specify formal rules that generate every grammatical sentence of a language and none of the ungrammatical ones, treating meaning as something determined by syntactic structure rather than the reverse. Noam Chomsky proposed generative syntax in the late 1950s, building on earlier work by Zellig Harris and Louis Hjelmslev; his 1957 book Syntactic Structures laid out the original theory, transformational grammar, which he revised through the 1970s and 1980s into government and binding theory and then reworked again in 1995 into the minimalist program. Other frameworks grew out of the same generative tradition, including generalized phrase structure grammar, generative semantics, head-driven phrase structure grammar, lexical functional grammar, nanosyntax, relational grammar, and harmonic grammar. Cognitive and usage-based grammars emerged from that same generative lineage but committed to an evolutionary rather than a strictly Chomskyan view of language, while still often keeping the generative assumption that an object belongs inside the verb phrase. This cognitive linguistics tradition includes cognitive grammar, construction grammar, and emergent grammar.