TIV TRANSFORMATIONAL GENERATIVE SYNTAX: AN ACCOUNT

OF

DELETION AND ADJUNCTION

BY

WAYA, DAVID TARHOM

PG/M.A/09/51974

DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS, IGBO AND OTHER

NIGERIAN LANGUAGES

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA

JULY 2012

i

TITLE PAGE

TIV TRANSFORMATIONAL GENERATIVE SYNTAX: AN ACCOUNT OF

DELETION AND

ADJUNCTION

BY

WAYA DAVID TARHOM

PG/M.A/09/5197

4

AN M.A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS,

IGBO AND OTHER NIGERIAN LANGUAGES, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA,

NSUKKA, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

AWARD OF MASTER OF ARTS (M.A) DEGREE IN LINGUISTICS

2

3

JULY

2012

CERTIFICTION

This is to certify that Waya, David Tarhom, a PostGraduate

student of the Department of Linguistics, Igbo and other

Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, and

whose registration number is PG/M.A/09/51974 has

satisfactorily completed the requirements for the award of

Master of Arts (M.A) in Linguistics.

___________________

_________________

DR. B.M MBAH Esq

PROF C.N OKEBALAMA

3

4

Supervisor

Head of Department

APPROVAL

PAGE

This project has been approved for the award of the Degree

of Master of Arts (M.A) of the Department of Linguistics,

4

5

Igbo and other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria

Nsukka.

By

____________________

______________________

DR.B.M .MBAH Esq

PROF C.N. OKEBALAMA

SUPERVISOR

Head of Department

____________________

_________________

External Examiner

Dean, Faculty of Arts

5

6

6

7

DEDICATION

This project is dedicated to God Almighty for his love,

protection, grace and mercy upon my life. I also dedicate

the work to my father, late Chief Waya Swande Gbaka for

exposing my Mother Mama Mbazendan Waya to the true

challenges of life.

7

8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I appreciate most specially God Almighty for his mercies,

protection, love and grace throughout the study.

My gratitude to my supervisor, Barr. Dr. B.M. Mbah

whose attention, patience, advice and encouragement made

this work a success . My appreciation to lovingly my

wife, Mrs. Onyinye David- Wayas for her wonderful

encouragement and support. The crucial role of the

following academics in the department desire special

acknowledgement, these include: Prof. C.N Okebalama, Prof.

Nwadike, Prof. (Mrs) Nwaozuzu, Dr. C. Agbedo, Prof. R.I

Okorji, Dr (Mrs) E.E. Mbah, Dr. (Mrs) Uguru, J.O, Dr.

Ikeokwu, E.S, Dr. O. Babarinde, Mz Chuma Okeke and Miss

Benita Uzoigwe . The motivation, love and prayers offered

me during my one year of National Youth service corps in

the department of Linguistics, University of Nigeria later

earned me employment as Graduate Assistant. I am also

grateful to following academic and non- academic staff in

the department: Ahamefula, Nduibuisi, Mrs Okeke (nee

8

9

Obasi), Miss. Ogechukwu Nneji, Mr. Ojobor, Patience,

Maryrose and Mrs. Ogama

I must acknowledge my family for the show of love;

Mama Rebecca Waya ,Mascot, Alex, Orkuma, Yongo ,

Demesugh , Kpokolun, Tarumbur , Mrs Alex, Mrs. Mascot . I

appreciate my wonderful in-laws: Mama Roseline Ani ,

Simeon, Mrs B. Ihenacho (nee Ani), Mrs. Ify Giovani, Mrs.

Lizzy Okorouga, Bro. Mathew Ani and Miss. Angel Ani your

kind prayers.

Mention must be made of the Prof. Bath Okolo (whom God

used for my academic job in UNN ), Mr. Tivde , Mr. Ukura

Samuel, Dr. Samuel Ortom, Mr. T. Godo, Mr. U.Alloy,Mr.

Festus Mbapuun, Mr. Micheal Tsav,Mr. Apeku Solomon.

Mr.Orafaga Sabastin, Mr.Walter Tachia, Mr. Upa,T. , Mr.

Akor , Mr. Samuel Beer, Mr.Clement Bam,Mr. Ornguga

(jabody), Chief Akputu, Evan. Aondowase Atetan, Chief Mrs

Joyce Akaagerger, Mrs Doo Dzoho, Mr. and Mrs. Atser, Mr.

Akange Audu, Mrs. Ahile.,Miss Eucharia Kwaghga, Mr.

Dominic Ajir (Dom best), Mr. Adzagee Douglas, Mr.

Ternenge Agba, Mr. James Kertyo, Mr. James Kaana , Mr.

Akpen Godwin, Comdr. Ayo Jeremiah for your prayers, moral

and financial supports. I also appreciate my course mates

for the unity and love witnessed during our studies. I

love them all.

Waya, David Tarhom

ABBREVIATIONS AND TONE MARKING CONVENTION

9

10

The work adopted Welmer’s tone marking convention which

states that only the first of the sequence of syllables on

the same pitch level is marked leaving the subsequent ones

unmarked until a contrasting pitch is reached and get

marked. Secondly, two consecutive acute marks are to be

interpreted as high followed by down step in the same word

or across word. (Welmer, 1973).

Realised as

AUX- Auxiliary

VP - verb phrase

NP - noun phrase

So - initial stage

Si - final stage

FSG - finite state grammar

PSG - phrase structure grammar

TGG - Transformational generative grammar

SA - structural Analysis

SC - structural change

SD - structural description

X / Y - variable

10

11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page ……………………………………………………………………. . i

Certification …………………………………………………………………….. ii

Approval Page ………………………………………………………………….. iii

Dedication ……………………………………………………………………. iv

Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………….. v

Abbreviations and Tone Convention………………………………………………...vi

Table of Contents...……………………………………………………………… vii

Abstract ……………………………………………………………………. viii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study …………………………………………………..1

1.2 Statement of the Problem………………………………………………….5

1.3 Research Questions ……………………………………………………….5

1.4 Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………6

1.4 Significance of the Study …………………………………………………

7

1.5 Scope/ Delimitation of the Study ……………………………………………

7

11

12

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Conceptual Approach to Generative Grammar: An

Overview ………… 8

2.2 Theoretical Framework …………………………………………………... 15

2.2.1 Transformation ………………………………………………………… 18

2.2.2 Generative ………………………………………………………………… 19

2.2.2.1 Generative Rule ………………………………………………………….. 20

2.2.2.2 Transformational Rules ………………………………………………… …21

2.2.3 Grammar……………………………………………………………………23

2.3 Types of Transformation

………………………………………………….23

2.3.1 Deletion Transformation…………………………………………………….23

2.3.1.1 Imperativisation …………………………………………………………....25

2.3.1.2 Dative Deletion …………………………………………………………… 26

2.3.1.3 Deletion under the Condition of Identity

…………………………………..27

2.3.1.4 Relativisation………………………………………………………………..28

2.3.1.5 Deletion under the Condition of

Indefiniteness……………………………..28

2.3.1.6 Conjunction Reduction……………………………………………………..29

2.3.1.7 Affix Hopping………………………………………………………………30

2.3.2 Adjunction Transformation …………………………………………………..30

2.3.2.1 Extraposition………………………………………………………………..31

2.3.2.2 Do Support………………………………………………………………….32

2.3.2.3 There-Insertion………………………………………………………………32

2.3.2.4 Focus and Topicalisation……………………………………………………33

2.4 Relationship between Move Alpha and Adjunction/

Substitution…………35

12

13

2.5 Empirical Studies………………………………………………………… 41

2.6 Summary of Literature Review…………………………………………… 42

CHAPTER THREE: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

3.0 Preamble……………………………………………………………………… 43

3.1 Deletion Transformation in Tiv

Syntax……………………………………… 43

3.1.1 Imperativisation……………………………………………………………… 46

3.1.2 Equi NP Deletion…………………………………………………………. 49

3.1.2 Equi VP Deletion…………………………………………………………… 52

3.1.3 Deletion under the Condition of Indefiniteness

………………………… 54

3.1.4 Relativisation………………………………………………………………. .54

3.1.5 Affix Hopping…………………………………………………………… …56

3.2 Adjunction Transformation in Tiv

Syntax……………………………………56

3.2.1 Extraposition……………………………………………………………….. 58

3.2.2 “kwagh er/or er” Insertion……………………………………………….. ….59

3.2.3 Yes/No Question in Tiv ………………………………………………………60

3.2.4 Reflexivisation………………………………………………………………..61

3.2.5 Focusing and Topicalisation………………………………………………….63

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

4.1 Findings …………………………………………………………………65

4.2 Recommendation……………………………………………………......65

4.3 Contribution of the Study………………………………………………65

4.4 Conclusion…………………………………………………………… 66

References…………………………………………………………………

13

14

AbstractThis research examines Tiv Transformational generativesyntax with focus on deletion and adjunction. Deletion andadjunction are among the four types of transformation[deletion, adjunction, substitution and movement].Deletion eliminates an existing constituent whileadjunction adds a non existing constituent in atransformed structure. Our main thrust is therefore toinvestigate with a view to justify whether with theaddition and subtraction, meaning remains intact andfurther see the applicability of transformationalgenerative grammar approach in Tiv syntacticconstructions. In this work, attempts have been made toexplain how other structures get generated from aparticular construction. The choice of deletion andadjunction against the other types is to make the studymore concise. The data were derived from introspective,library and internet sources. A transformation approachforms the methodology of data analysis. Finding revealsthat a given structure when transformed retains itsoriginality despite the elimination of existingconstituent (s) or addition of non-existing constituent(s). However, tone alternation in Tiv enhances the role ofthe subject structure which may partially affects theoriginal meaning. The theoretical presupposition thattransformation does not change or affect meaning does notcompletely apply at all levels in Tiv syntactic structure.Another finding shows that, in transforming Tiv compoundor complex sentences, the conjunction “shi” (also) overtlychanges to “man” (and) in some environment of complexsyntactic structures. This knowledge will therefore helpto develop the core of Tiv grammar and clear theambiguities often created when constituents or structuresare not tone marked. The work recommends for advancedresearch in the area of Tiv syntax so as to present thelanguage curriculum planners and teachers with the basicgrammatical tools for pedagogical materials. This willfurther place Tiv language on the map of developedlanguages.

14

15

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

The knowledge of any language entails a mastery of an

elaborate system of rules that enable a person to encode

and decode a limitless number of utterances in it. One

major subset of this rule system is the rule of phrase,

clause or sentence structures in languages of the world.

It is proper that any study of the syntax of a language

must provide a principled account of the process that

generates syntactic construction in it. At this level of

linguistic analysis, attempt is usually made to capture

15

16

the structure of language as a core means of human

communication.

The core approach to grammar is traditionally

subdivided into two different but interrelated areas of

study [morphology and syntax]. According to Radford

(2004), morphology studies how words are formed out of

smaller units called morphemes while the study of the way

in which phrases, clauses and sentences are structured out

of words is called syntax. Grammar is therefore a set of

rules that indicate the structure and interpretation of

sentences which native speakers of a language accept as

belonging to the language. Allyn and Balon (1994) note

that a significant break in linguistic tradition came in

1957, the year Noam Chomsky’s Syntactic Structures appeared and

presented the concept of transformational generative

grammar. The generative grammar is essentially one that

projects one or more given sets of sentences that make up

the language one adopt in description. Transformational

generative grammar attempts to describe a native speaker’s

linguistic competence by setting descriptions as rules for

generating an infinite number of grammatical sentences.

Languages of the world vary. Linguistics as a

scientific study of language does not only describe the

characteristics of an individual language but adopt a

theoretical concept that shows the general properties that

languages have in common. In other words, a theory of

language should be able to account for almost all

languages. The generative grammar as approached by Chomsky

16

17

must also be explicit, that is, it must precisely specify

the rules of the grammar and their operating conditions.

Chomsky's theories have over the years, undergone

developments and changes; his so-called Standard Theory

has been succeeded first by an Extended Standard Theory,

and much later by a modification of this known as Revised

Extended Standard Theory or REST, several other

modifications, and finally, Minimalist theory. All along,

though, right up to the very latest developments, the

organization of his grammar has been (either implicitly or

explicitly) modular, i.e. it is so organized that lingual

phenomena are treated in separate components of the

theory. Thus syntax, semantics and phonology are

autonomous components. What changes from one theory to the

next may be various interpretations of what should be

treated under each component, but the essential modular

approach has remained (Radford, 1981: 12.). One reason for

adopting such an approach is that problems of theoretical

explanation occurring in one component or module are in a

sense localized. If such problems can be solved by simply

making adjustments to one sub-part or component of the

theory, there may be less serious implications for the

others, and fewer modifications will eventually have to be

made.

The standard version of the Transformational

Generative Grammar (henceforth TGG) to sentence analysis

recognizes four types or levels of transformation:

Movement (permutation), Copying (substitution), Insertion

17

18

(adjunction) and Deletion respectively. In this study,

emphasis is on Deletion and Adjunction transformation in

Tiv syntax.

Historically, Tiv is a language spoken by most Tiv

people in Benue state while some of the speakers live in

Plateau, Nasarawa, Taraba, Cross River and Cameroon. The

linguistic studies on Tiv from the pioneer works of R. C

Abraham to date have generally accepted that there are no

dialects in Tiv or that dialect differences are only

minor. Heinz (1992) however observes that there are

distinct dialects which differ from each other in lexical

items, use of suffixes in noun class system, apocopy,

tonal progressive or regressive assimilation etc.

Nevertherless, it is generally considered that the

translated Tiv Bible is the “Standard Tiv orthography”.

The earliest linguistic studies on Tiv grammar were

carried out by R. C Abraham. Abraham (1934) produces the

grammar of Tiv in which the phonetic and tonal systems of

the language were thoroughly analysed.

The Tiv syntax remains an area that is less studied.

Iomba (1988), Orjime (2002) and Udu (2009) attempt looking

at the the general syntactic categories of the Tiv

language. In their works, Orjime’s approach to Tiv Syntax

places emphasis on the structural arrangement of Tiv

phrasal and sentence types. He argues that the Tiv

language is generally a subject, verb, object (SVO)

language. The recent attempt by Udu (2009) only analyses

the parts of speech evident in Tiv constructions and the

18

19

type of sentences. In this direction, Waya (2010) in the

study of deletion transformation in Tiv argues that

transformation retains meaning and the level of its

occurrence in Tiv are imperativisation, Equi NP, Equi-VP

deletions, and the condition of indefiniteness. Despite

the attempt, the study failed to make a vivid analysis and

futher account for transformational levels like affix

hopping, relativisation. This study therefore intends to

consider the possible levels of occurrence in the Tiv

language.

The other Tiv scholars in their works failed to build

their analysis in any version of Model of TGG. This study

is therefore a concise approach in retracting the

inadequate studies in Tiv syntax. Since TGG is the major

breakthrough in syntactic theories, it is important to

adopt it in analysis of Tiv syntax. In order words, the

study intends to offer explanation on the structural

ambiguity often created within the framework of structural

grammar. Deletion and adjunction transformations as types

of transformation are more relevant in justifying whether

transformation is meaning preserving or not.

Transformational analysis results into insertion of units

that are not originally at the deep structure or units

that are originally present at D structure but get elided

at the surface structure. Meanwhile the movement and

substitution transformations do not remove or add any new

unit rather they create room for deletion or insertion to

occur.

19

20

1.2 Statement of the Problem

There is no sufficient evidence so far to show that

syntax in general and transformational grammar in

particular has been explored in the study of the Tiv

language. Therefore, one may not appreciate Tiv syntax or

grammar without subjecting its analysis within the

theoretical tenet of TGG. Before the emergence of TGG as a

theory, the existing structuralism like Immediate

Constituents Analysis (ICA) and Phrase Structure Grammar

(PSG) failed to account for all possible sentences in

languages. They cannot account for sentences exhibiting

nested dependencies nor could they account for ambiguous

sentences. Also, structuralism cannot explain the semantic

sameness of structurally unrelated sentences. The arrival

of TGG resolves the unexplanatory tenet of structuralism.

Chomsky (1967) posits two arguments in support of

transformations as appropriate in accounting for the

structure of the sentence. He explains that: “(i) a

sentence with superficial differences can be proved to

have common origin and show similar meaning, and, (ii) the

sentences with some similarities on the surface can proved

to come from different underlying sentences” (Ndimele

1999:15)

In transformational analysis, certain constituents or

units get deleted, substituted, moved or added. Since

meaning is central to any syntactic construction, the

20

21

original meaning may overtly change as a result of re-

arrangement that occurs in the structural transformation.

Since the grammar or syntax of languages varies, it is

more appropriate to subject the syntax of a particular

language to a theoretical framework. In general, not much

has been done on Tiv syntax using TGG in its analysis.

This is based on the observation that studies carried out

generally in Tiv syntax in this direction remains

inadequate or did not go into detailed or scientific

explanation. The attempts so far made by Tiv scholars like

Iormba (1988), Orjime (2004) and Udu (2009) only looked at

the syntactic structures using phrase structure rule

within the framework of structuralism. They failed to

employ any model of TGG which has the basic tenet in

accounting for ambigous syntactic structures. The attempt

by Waya (2010) on deletion transformation failed to

convincingly justify the claim that transformation does

not change the original meaning. His paper could not

explore beyond deletion. However, there are four types of

transformation; deletion, adjunction, substitution and

movement.

With the inadequate studies in Tiv syntax, learners of

the language find it difficult to resolve the problem of

lexical or grammatical items/ structures that may pose

ambiquity. The lack of advanced studies in Tiv syntax

using models of syntactic theories also makes it difficult

for learners or teachers of the language to have a

comprehensive guide. There is a wide gap existing in the

21

22

Tiv language based on scanty research works in it

(syntax). The status of any language depends on the level

of research in the aspect of its syntax which is the core

of language grammar.

The problem is therefore to investigate the pattern of

Tiv transformational generative process with a clear focus

on deletion and adjunction. Addition of new unit(s) on

existing ones and deletion of existing unit in a

particular structure through transformation pose

confusion. Mathematically, there is a plus (+) minus (-)

operational pattern that takes place. Consequently, the

realization of syntactic, semantic and phonological

components of the language is threatened through

transformation. Since linguistics is an empirical science

which does not rely on assumption, the need for thorough

inquiry into the intricacies of Tiv syntax with

transformational analysis is set to establish and show the

syntactic re-ordering whether transformation change has

any effect on a given structure as a result of deletion

and adjunction or not.

1.3 Research Questions

This study seeks to find answers to the following

leading questions:

(a) How does deletion transformation occur in Tiv syntax?

(b) How does adjunction transformation occur in Tiv

syntax?

22

23

(c) How do we see the difference between deletion and

adjunction transformation in Tiv syntax?

(d) How does Tiv transformational generative syntax

structure operate?

(e) What are the significant issues in Tiv syntax

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The general purpose of this research is to carry out

study on Deletion and Adjunction in Tiv syntactic

constructions with view of establishing the pattern of it

operation.To this end, the specific objectives of the

study are as follow:

(a) To analyse the pattern of deletion transformation in

Tiv syntax

(b) To analyse the pattern of adjunction transformation

in Tiv syntax

(c) To differentiate between deletion and adjunction

transformations in Tiv

syntax

(d) To find out pattern of transformation in Tiv

syntactic structures

(e) To set a pace for studies and fill in the gap

existing in Tiv language within

model of syntactic theories.

1.5 Significance of the Study

This work provides the following significance:

23

24

It will answer the above research questions thereby

establishing: how deletion occurs in Tiv syntax when there

is a transformation, how adjunction occurs in Tiv syntax

as a result of transformation, ascertain the differences

and similarities in occurrence of deletion and adjunction

in Tiv syntactic constructions, the work will also state

the pattern of Tiv syntax and prove whether transformation

actually changes the original meaning or extends the

semantics of the rearranged structure.

The work is also relevant on the ground that it will

reinforce the need to explore Tiv syntax within the

syntactic theories. It will further fill in the gap and

provide the empirical research material for intending

scholars in Tiv syntax and subscribe a formitive guide to

researchers on the similar field. In other words, it will

be of immense benefit to researchers in Tiv syntax and

semantics. They will find it important in the study of the

interface between form and meaning. The results will

establish a solution to the issue of ambiguity and

ungrammaticality in certain Tiv constructions. It will

further fill the gap that exists in Tiv syntax within the

claim of transformational models of generative grammar.

1.6 Scope / Delimitation of the Study

The study indentifies deletion and adjunction

transformation in Tiv syntax. To discuss this topic

effectively, the deletion transformation in Tiv covers the

levels of imperativisation, Equi-NP deletion, Equi-VP

24

25

deletion, deletion under the condition of indefiniteness,

relativisation, Affix hopping and focus and

topicalisation. The study will also treat Adjunction

transformation at the levels of Extra-position, (There)

Kwagh er/or er insertion. Yes/No question and

reflexivisation.

25

26

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

The review of literature is studied under the

following subheadings:

1 Conceptual Approach to Generative Grammar

2. Theoritical Framework

3. Emprical Study

4. Summary of the Review

2.1 Conceptual Approach to Generative Grammar: An

Overview

In theoretical linguistics, generative grammar is

generally seen as a bold approach to the study of syntax.

A generative grammar of a language attempts to give a set

of rules that correctly predict which combination of words

form grammatical sentences. Generative grammar is an

approach which sees languages as interesting because it is

structured in an ordered manner. According to Wikipedia

(2011), language offers a means to study the nature of the

mind that produces it. According to Chomsky (1965),

language is based on a system of rules determining the

interpretation of it infinitely use of sentences. In this

view, language makes infinite use of finite means and that

its grammar must describe the processes that make this

possible. In modern linguistic approach, attempts have

been made to construct explicit generative grammars for

particular languages and to explore their consequences.

Chomsky (1965) further observes that, the central role of

any grammar is to be empirically adequate inorder to

26

27

establish its firmness. However, there remain questions as

to the proper form of the theory of transformational

grammar. Chomsky (1965) posits that a grammar of a

language purports to be a description of the ideal speaker

hearer’s intrinsic competence, if the grammar is perfectly

implicit. He further states that a fully adequate grammar

must assign to each of infinite range of sentences a

structural description indicating how sentence is

understood by the ideal speaker-hearer. According to him,

it is the problem of descriptive linguistics and

traditional grammars that gives a wealth of information

concerning structural descriptions of sentences. The

limitations of traditional and structural grammars should

be clearly appreciated. It is from these that generative

grammar emerged.

According to Mbah (2011), generative syntax could be

described as any syntactic model which formulates rules to

describe the sentence of the language. This means that the

rules are such that they are pyramid in structure. Some of

the rules will be explicable within or captured by some

other rules within the system of rules. Yule (1996:101)

observes that, this explicit system of rules would have

much in common with the types of rules found in

mathematics. He explains that the mathematical

representation overtly explains the meaning of the term

“generative”, which is used to describe this type of

grammar. He demonstrates using algebraic expression like

3x + 2y, when x and y are assigned the value of any

27

28

whole number, then the algebraic expression of this nature

can generate an endless set of values, by following the

simple rules of arithmetic. When x = 5 and y = 10, then,

the result is 35. When x = 2 and y = 1, then, the result

is 8. These results according to Yule (1996) can follow

directly from applying the explicit rules. This means that

the endless set of such result is generated by the

operation of explicitly formalised rules. Such a set of

explicit rules is what he referred to as a ‘generative

grammar’.

Three models of generative grammar as posited by

Chomsky (1957) are the Finite State Grammar (FSG), Phrase

Structure Grammar (PSG) and Transformational Generative

Grammar (TGG). He notes that the models are generative in

approach with varying degrees of generative capacity

(Ndimele 1999). According to Chomsky (1957) cited in Nwala

(2004:117), the “Finite grammar” is the simplest type of

grammar which has a finite amount of apparatus that can

generate an infinite number of sentences”.

Transformational generative grammar is known as a more

powerful model while the FSG is the weakest of all the

generative types of grammar. FSG uses abstract devices to

generate sentences. Chomsky (1957) describes FSG as a

machine which is made up of stages at which constituents

are deposited as the derivation progresses from left to

right. According to him, the derivation has two extremes;

the beginning stage and the terminal stage with other

possible intermediate positions. The initial stage is

28

29

symbolized as So while the final stage is symbolised as

S1. This means that the derivational process registers

constituents along the derivational path as it passes from

one stage to another. Nwala (2004:117) clearly represents

the rules of the derivation as follows:

1.(i) S0 X S1 or

(ii) S1 S2 X

Despite its relative generative capacity, Ndimele

(1999:147) states the number of shortcomings, which

includes:

(i ) FSG cannot generate an Xn + Yn type of

construction, the type whereby X which

generates up to a certain number is

followed by the same number of Y’s. (ii) It

cannot account for constructions that

exhibit discontinuous nested dependency.

(iii) FSG cannot explicitly account for the

ability of a native speaker of a language

to produce and comprehend certain new

utterances or pass any successful judgment

about the grammaticality of certain

constructions in his language. (iv)The

rules which account for sentence derivation

in FSG are not constrained enough, so as

not to allow the grammar to generate

ungrammatical sentences.

The idea behind any analysis of human language is not

just a model or grammar that will register symbols or

29

30

constituents. He observes that we need to be able to

identify the constituents in grammatical terms.

Ndimele (1999) describes phrase structure grammar as

more powerful than FSG because of its rewrite pattern.

Agbedo (2000) notes that PSG is a rewrite grammar which

provides the mechanism for splitting up a sentential

structure into its constituents, beginning with the

immediate constituents which are in the form of abstract

symbols such as S –NP- AUX -VP -ADJUNCT. Ndimele (1999)

succinctly posits that, the major difference between PSG

and earlier models is that it makes use of formalised

phrase structure rules (PS-rules). He further states that

the PS rules provide information regarding the categorial,

functional and relational properties of constituents.

These rules are generative in nature. Chomsky (1957:26)

represents the rule for generating sentence as;

(2) S NP + VP

The rule when rewritten gives

S NP + AUX + VP

NP Det + N

VP V + NP

AUX T (M) + (Have + en) + (be + ing)

(Adapted from Agbedo 2000)

The rule demonstrates how PSG is the formalisation of

immediate constituent grammar.

In PSG, two types of grammars are recognised. Nwala

(2004:20) posits them as “context free grammar and

30

31

sensitive grammar’. The context free grammar has this

format:

3. X Y

That is, X should be rewritten as Y in every environment.

This aspect of the PSG is not constrained or restricted in

any form. Chomsky (1957:1965) asserts that the context

sensitive PSG is a type of grammar which is severely

constrained, it is made up of context sensitive rules.

Ndimele (1999) notes this view by saying that, “a context

sensitive rule operates on a set of symbol(s) to yield an

output under a certain condition”. It is of the type which

says, for instance X becomes Y only when X is followed by

X (Ndimele 1999:153).

These aspects of generative grammar failed to satisfy

the three levels of adequacies identified as satisfying

any syntactic description. Mbah (2011) notes the

adequacies as being observational, descriptive and

explanatory in nature. Accordingly, for a syntactic

description to be adequate, its data have to derive from

observable phenomena of the language behaviour. In other

words, using the structural model of data collection and

analysis in which observable behaviours are collected,

collated data are put into analysis to bring an accurate,

reliable state that describes the said behaviour.

According to Chomsky (1957), description invites the

filtration or elicitation of unacceptable features of the

language co-existing with the underlying principles, which

give rise to such behaviour. The explanatorily adequate

31

32

syntactic description has to explain the surface and deep

structures of language and account for its universal

character and specific or relative tendency (Mbah

2011:59).

The ineffective approach in explaining linguistic

constructs using phrase structure rules and immediate

constituent analysis resulted to transformational

generative grammar by Chomsky. Chomsky (1965) identifies

the three levels of adequacies in the thrust of TGG. Nwala

(1999) affirms that one could rightly adjuged TGG as the

remedy to the shortfalls of the PSG.

According to Wikipedia (2011), the usual usage of the

term transformation in linguistics refers to a rule that

takes an input typically called the deep structure (in the

standard theory) or structural change (in the extended

standard theory or government and binding theory) and the

change in some instructed way to result in a surface

structure (or S- structure). Allyn and Bacon (1998) assert

that unlike structuralism whose goal is to examine the

sentences we actually speak and to describe their systemic

nature, the transformational approach poses to unlock the

secrets of language, in order words, to build a model of

our internal rules, a model that would produce all the

grammatical and ungrammatical sentences.

According to Prioker (1999) Chomsky’s became famous

for proposing that every sentence in the mind of a speaker

is an invisible and inaudible deep structure that

interfaces with mental lexicon. The deep structure is

32

33

converted by transformational rules into a surface

structure that corresponds more closely to what is

pronounced and heard. The rationale according to Prioker

(1999) is that, in certain constructions, if they were

listed in the mind as surface structures, it would have to

be multiplied out in thousands of redundant variations

that would be learned one by one, whereas if the

construction were listed as deep structures, they would be

simple, few in number, and economically learned.

Erilbaum (1999) observes that Chomsky initially

justified replacing structural grammar by arguing that it

was awkward, complex, and incapable of providing adequate

accounts of language. However, transformational grammar

according to Chomsky offers a simple and elegant way of

understanding language and it offered new insights into

the underlying psychological mechanisms. He further

explains that transformation of transformational grammar

is evident in the theory. As the grammar matured, it lost

its simplicity and much of its elegance. In line with

this, the theories turned more abstract and in many

respects became complex; however those with specialized

training in linguistics are likely to accommodate and

adopt it.

According to Giosue (2005), each sentence in a

language has two levels of representations; deep structure

and surface Structure. The deep structure is more or less

a direct representation of the basic semantic relation

underlying sentence and it is mapped onto the surface

33

34

structure which followed the phonological form of the

sentence via transformation. Chomsky believes that there

would be considerable similarities between deep structures

of different languages, and that these structures would

reveal properties common to all languages which were

concealed by their surface structure (Wikipedia 2011)

Robin (2004) states that, deep structures of

syntactic constructions operate on semantics for the

purpose of semantic interpretation. Surface structure is

the aspect of syntactic structure that operates on

phonology for the purpose of phonetic interpretation. The

surface structure is more immediately obvious and the deep

structure takes into consideration the transformation. TG

accentuates that the structures relevant for semantic

interpretation turn out to be different from those which

are relevant for phonological interpretation.

Radford (1992) also notes the two levels of

structures (deep structure and surface structure) as

interrelated by transformation. The postulation of

movement rules has important consequences for the overall

organisation of the model of grammar. The reason is that

the incorporation of syntactic movement rules into a

grammar presupposes that there are two different levels of

syntactic structure in grammars: (i) the level of D-

structure which serves as input to the movement rules, and

(ii) the level of S- structure which serves as the output

of the movement rule. Radford (1992:419) further asserts

that “structures are generated from D-structures by the

34

35

application of movement rules; but how are D- structures

generated?” He assummes that the categorial component (or

Base Component) of the grammar directly generates D-

structure (or Base structures), and that these then serve

as input to a set of movement rules which convert (or to

use the relevant technical term map) them into the

corresponding S- structures. This revised model of the

syntactic component of a grammar might be represented

below:

(4)

Base

D – Structures

Movement transformations

S – Structure

In essence, the categorial component of the base

generates abstract prelexical structures which are

lexicalised by insertion of items from the lexicon.

According to Radford (1992), these lexicalised structures

are known as D- structures (or Base structure). In the

subsequent application of movement transformation, the D-

structures are then mapped or transformed into the

corresponding S- structures.

At this point, it is pertinent to distinguish between

generative syntax and transformational generative Grammar.

Mbah (2011) posits that generative syntax could be

35

36

described as any syntactic model, which formulates rules

to describe the sentence of the language. Rini (2007) sees

it as one that is fully explicit, in the sense that it

consists of a set of rules by which it is possible to

decide whether any given sentence is grammatical or not.

In this sense, a sentence is seen not as a string of words

but rather a tree with subordinate and superordinate

branches connected at nodes. On the other hand, Mbah

(2011:61) notes that “transformational generative syntax

relates to the transformational syntactic rules, which

generate rules of surface and deep structure syntax”. Rini

(2007) asserts that TGG is an explicit model of what an

ideal speaker of the language intuitively knows about the

language.

The ambiguity in structure cannot be resolved by a

traditional grammar approach as it would focus on the

surface structure (the word order). But the problem lies

in the deep structure since it has underlying structures.

However, TG can account for the ambiguity in a structure.

It is therefore clear that the deep structures of two

sentences which look identical at the surface may quite be

different at the deep level. Therefore to examine and

explain ambiguity, TG approach is always preferable to the

traditional rules. The theory is highly abstract but at

the same time it checks the ambiguity in syntactic

analysis. This is probably one of the most fascinating

aspects of transformational-generative grammar. This

36

37

further explains some of its huge influence on linguistic

theory.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

The general principles governing the operation of the

transformational component of a grammar have always been

one of the central issues in the theory of syntax. In this

study, the transformational generative grammar forms the

theoretical framework for the analyses of Deletion and

Adjunction in Tiv.

. According to Wikipedia (2011), a transformational

generative grammar (TGG) is a generative grammar,

especially of natural language, that has been developed in

Chomskyan tradition of phrase structure grammar (as

opposed to dependency grammars). Additionally,

transformational grammar is the tradition that gives rise

to specific transformational grammars. Prior to this idea,

Robin (2004) notes phrase structure as quite adequate for

a small part of the language and that the rest of the

language can be derived by repeated applications of rather

simple set of transformations to the strings given the

phrase structure grammar. In 1957, Chomsky propounded the

theory of transformational generative grammar with a view

to addressing the inadequacies of other syntactic

theories.

Since 1957, in the revolutionary publication of Chomsky

view, several versions of Transformational Generative

Grammar emerged. In spite of all these revisions and

37

38

modifications, the models are basically the same. However,

the standard version holds that meaning is complete before

transformation ever starts. This means that the rearranged

or deleted items have no meaning attached to the

structure. According to this version, the meaning is found

at deep structure. While the Extended Standard Theory

(EST) posits that both deep and surface structures

contribute to the semantic representation unlike the ST

model. Agbedo (2003) equally notes that EST brings about

trace. According to him, the Revised Extended Standard

Theory (REST) holds that even though some lexical items

may have been rearranged or deleted, they still leave

their traces. The traces are seen as the properties of D-

structure. This according to Riemsdijk and William (1986)

makes it possible for thematic rule to be applied on the

S- structure. Consequently, the move alpha introduced a

constraining mechanism over the overt descriptive power of

TGG. This led to what Chomsky and Lasnik (1977) refer to

as T-model, which consists of syntax, phonology and

semantics. Despite all these, the rudiment of the theory

remains the bases for other models.

In TGG, there are two aspects of this theory; the

grammar that is both ‘transformational and ‘generative’;

these two aspects are not logically dependent upon each

other, though the theory gains plausibility from the

interaction of the two (Robin 2004:340). This futher shows

that the theory is basically handled by looking at the

38

39

three major concepts; 'transformation’, ‘generative’ and

‘Grammar’.

2.2.1 Transformation

Essentially, transformation is a method of stating

how the structures of sentences in languages can be

generated or explained. This applies to certain basic type

of structures (Robins 2004). He further stresses that, the

basic structures are not necessarily basic or minimal from

the point of view of immediate constituent analysis. The

transformational syntax therefore presupposes a certain

amount of Phrase Structure Grammar or the immediate

constituent type to provide the basis of the ‘kernel’s

notion from which transformations starts. He however

observes that, the notion has been abandoned by Chomsky

since the publication of his “Aspects of theory of syntax” (Robin

2004: 341).

In syntactic tranformation structure, Chomsky handles

the active- passive relationship by saying that if S1 is a

grammatical sentence with the form;

(5) NP1 … Aux - - - V - -. NP2,

the corresponding string of the form is

NP2 - - Aux - - + be + en – V- by + NP1

This explains how an active sentence is converted into a

passive sentence. Robin (2004) posits that we have to

change the positions of the NP and insert “by” before the

second one in the passive and at the same time change the

verb from active into passive. In this way, the sentence

becomes:

39

40

(6) (i) the door was opened by John

Gives the transformation of the sentence as

(ii) John opened the door.

Robin (2004) further notes that much of transformation

occurs in English but is not always paralleled in most

languages of the world. Also, permutation usually occurs

in English but not in most languages. Permutation is the

type of transformation which moves elements of a sentence

from one position to another within the same syntactic

structure (Mbah 2011:32). For example, the permutation

that has:

7. (i)“Jim played the piano?” is the transformation

of

(ii)“Jim has played the piano”.

This occurs with all the auxiliary verbs of English as:

8. “is he coming?”, can you go?”, “must I sleep?”,

etc

Robin (2004:67) further contends that “if there is no

auxiliary verb in such constructions, the verb ‘do’ has to

be supplied to act as one” for example:

9. (i) He goes. Does he go?

(ii) They play. Do they play?

(iii) We came. Did we come?

The more important type of transformation is

“relative transformation which involves more than one

“kernel sentence”. According to Crystal (2002), there is a

sense in which one sentence can be part of another

sentence which means that a structure can be embedded into

40

41

another.The sentence that is embedded into another is

known as the “constituent” and the sentence into which it

is embedded is the “Matrix”. For example, the sentence:

10 a.the boy who was standing ran away.

can be treated as a transformation of the two sentences:

b (i) the boy ran away

(ii) boy was standing

In the above structures, the relative transformation

places the second sentence after ‘boy’ in the first and

then replaces the boy ‘in the second by ‘who’. The

relevance of transformational grammar becomes obvious when

we see the way in which it can resolve ambiguity in

sentences. Robin (2004:72) clearly illustrates as follows:

11. Visiting professors can be dangerous.

In disambuiguiting the sentence in two senses, “ the

action of visiting Professors can be dangerous” and

“professors who visit can be dangerous”. This shows the

difference in the matrix and the constituent of the

sentence as well as the place of embedding.

2.2.2 Generative

The other characteristic feature of TG is that it is

`generative’. According to Wikipedia (2011) a grammar must

‘generate all and only the grammatical sentences of a

language. It means that the grammar must be so designed by

following its rules and conventions; we can produce all or

any of the possible sentences of the language. To

‘generate’ is thus to predict what can be sentence of the

language or to‘specify’what is the possible a sentence of

41

42

the language. Thus a grammar should ‘generate’’, ‘specify’

and ‘predict’ the possible sentences of the language. To

`generate' is thus to `predict'.

Robin (2004) states that generative approach in

grammar is not concerned with any actual set of sentences

of the language but with the possible set of sentences. He

explicates the point by saying that we are not concerned

with any observed sentences that have occurred, but rather

with those that can or could have occurred. Chomsky as

the advocate of TG points out that any corps has a finite

number of sentences, no matter, how large, yet a language

consists of an infinite number of sentences. Robin (2004)

equally asserts that this infinity is a result of

`recursion' that can apply in the same linguistic device

over and over again.

The generative grammar is explicit, that is, it

explicitly indicates just what the possible sentence of a

language is. By its rules and conventions, it generates

all the sentences. In other words, its rules and

conventions are totally explicit.

The `competence' and `performance' of a native speaker

of a language are related to the TG grammarians' interest

not in the neutral text but in what is linguistically

possible. The interest is not in the actual utterances of

the native speakers of a language but rather in what they

can say. This concerns his knowledge of the language, his

`competence' not what he actually does at any time. The

sentences he actually produces, which are a matter only of

42

43

performance. According to the theory, the native speaker

of a language has `internalized a set of rules' which

forms the basis of his ability to speak and understand his

language. It is the knowledge of these rules that is the

object of the linguist's attention, not the actual

sentences he produces (Robin 2004 234), (Chomsky 1981) & (

Radford: 1992).

Since TGG is a rule based grammar that gives

explanation to the kind of operation occurs in a

structure, the following forms TG rules:

2.2.2.1 Generative Rule

According to Chomsky (1957) cited in Robin (2004),

TG is a rule based grammar, therefore, the generative

rules share some characteristics of both prescriptive and

descriptive approaches. They are in the first place

instructions like the prescriptive rules but instead of

being instructions for the production of correct speech,

they are instructions for generating all the possible

sentences of the language. In the second place, like

descriptive rules, they relate to the facts of actual

languages not the invented languages of grammarians, and

are ultimately based, therefore, upon what people say

rather than what they ought to say.

The rules of TG are rewrite rules, that is to say,

they rewrite one symbol as another or as several others or

one set of symbols by another until eventually the

sentences of the language are generated. The rules start

with symbols `S' (sentence) and then a sequence of rules

43

44

rewrite this symbol until a sentence is produced. For

instance A---BC , the symbol A can be rewritten as BC

until a sentence is formed.

In TG, the phrase structure rules form the basic part

of the grammar and are technically described as the `base

component'. As long as we are restricted to PS rules, we

cannot generate passive sentences from active ones. Going

by its features, TG must contain not only PS rules but

also T rules. (Robin 2002).

2.2.2.2 Transformational Rules

Robin (2004: 256) posits T rules as having two parts.

The first part of this rule is a structural analysis

specifying the class of strings to which the rule applies.

The second part of the rule specifies the `structural

change'. As shown in the passive transformation:

13. SA = NP - Aux - V + NP

SC = X1 - X2 - X3 - X4----X4 - X2 + be + en - X3 -

by + X1

The above symbols SA stand for structural analysis which

contains a noun phrase, auxillary, a verb and another noun

phrase. When the active sentence is transformed, it

results into the structural change. This brings about

insertion of modal verb be+ en and ‘by’ shows the

structure in a passive form. The symbol X serves as a

variable.

Similarly, the mathematical representations can generate

sentences that involve co-ordination and sub-ordination. A

44

45

simple rule that combines in case of two sentences gives

thus:

14. SA= NP + Aux + V + NP; NP + Aux + V + NP

SC = X1-X2-X3-X4-X5-X6-X7-X8---X8-X5-X2-X3-X4.

The illustration above shows that two sentences are

involved through the use of coordination and subordination

as seen at the structural analysis. The complex structure

when transformed can render certain units in the structure

deleted.

Radford (1992) further notes the distinction between

the two kinds of T-rules: obligatory and optional T-

rules .According to him, TG can generate among many other

passive sentences from active ones, yet it cannot generate

even all active sentences without recourse to some

transformational rules. Some rules have to be applied in

order to produce sentences at all, such rules are

obligatory in nature. On the other hand, it is not to

transform an active sentence into a passive one. The rules

that convert active sentences into passive ones are

considered optional. In other word, the obligatory T rule

is provided by the element which is used to indicate the

occurrence of auxiliary verbs and tense. If it recognises

all this in a generative grammar, the first rule explains

Aux.

An important characteristic of some rules is that

they must be `ordered'. That is, one must be applied

before another; it must be applied in correct order even

though another order is possible, because if this is done

45

46

in a wrong order, it will generate different sentences. A

good example is provided by the rules for the concord of

subject and verb for the passive. In this sense, Crystal

(1999) suggests the passive T-rule and the concord rule.

2.2.3 Grammar

According to Wikipedia (2011), grammar is the set of

structural rules that govern the composition of

phrases,clauses and sentences in any natural language, the

term refers also to the study of such rules includes the

fileds of morphology, syntax and phonology often

complemented by phonetics, semantics and pragmatics.

Jeremy (2002) notes that ‘grammar’ is often generic, it

describes the linguistic facts of a language. A grammar of

a language in this sense means a theoretical instrument

which should generate all and only the well-formed

grammatical sentences of a language. Here a further

difference with behaviourist structuralism emerges.This

explains that not only should a grammar be observational

and descriptively adequate, but it must also strive to

attain explanatory adequacy. This means that the grammar

has to characterise a language in formal terms and

principles that represent psychologically plausible

mechanisms of mental computation. The reception of

Chomsky's theory, coming as it did in an environment that

was entirely hostile to its basic tenets and assumptions

would not have been so overwhelmingly enthusiastic if it

had not been backed up by substantial technical analyses

46

47

that set out to realise the research goals of generative

grammar (Radford: 1992).

. From this perspective, Chomsky (1981) affirms that

traditional grammar overlook is its inherent system, the

inner mechanism or what Saussure calls `Langue' at work

when an utterance is made. An individual can utter a

sentence and this sentence can have unpredictable

possibilities of variations. The grammar's role is not to

prescribe rules for the correctness of the sentence but to

find out the system at work which enables the individual

to manipulate such a great and complex range of

utterances.

Chomsky (1981) rightly asserts that traditional

grammars are deficient in that they leave unexposed many

of the basic regularities of the language. They emphasise

exceptions and irregularities but only give examples and

hints concerning regular and productive syntactic process

due to their preoccupation with the extra- linguistic view

of `natural order of thought' being reflected in the order

of words. The rules of sentence formations as formulated

by traditional grammarians do not belong to the field of

grammar.

In TG, a sentence refers to the individual elements

of which a language contains an infinite number. Grammar

is the concept which refers to finite systems which

specifies and generates the infinite number of sentences.

TG has a comprehensive approach as it deals with the

language on the syntactic, semantic, and phonological

47

48

levels. The three levels when put together represent

language in both its structural and functional terms. No

other grammar is complete in this sense. A sentence has

three components and their function can be exemplified

below:

15. (a) Harry loves Mary.

In this sentence, three lexical items have been put

together; this does not tell us anything about meaning.

The same words can be put into another order.

(b) Mary loves Harry.

(a) and (b) have the same lexical items but different

meaning. Similarly the phonological aspects-pronunciation,

intonation, stress can change the meaning of the

structure. Thus syntax combines in semantics and

phonological aspects which are integral to language as an

integral whole.

[phonology]------ [syntax]------[semantics]

The roles of the three components are not equal: syntax

has input, it is generated through rules and lexicon in

order to make infinite number of sentences. The other two

components operate on the structure specified by the

syntax assigning further structure to them. (Robin: 2004)

& (Chomsky: 1981).

2.3 Types of Transformation

According to Anagbogu et al (2010:1), transformations

do not just take place, “it is believed that the more

conscripted the deep structure the more informal the

relationship between the speakers and the more elaborate

48

49

the surface structure, the more defined the subject under

discourse.”

Transformation or change exists in four forms: Movement

(permutation), Deletion, Insertion (Adjunction) and

Copying (Substitution)

2.3.1 Deletion Transformations

Deletion transformation is a syntactic rule in

which a piece of a syntactic structure is removed under

specified conditions. In other words, deletion is the

elimination of certain constituents from the deep

structure.

2.3.1.1 Imperativisation

An imperative sentence is used to make a request, give

order or a command. Ndimele (1999) argues that in English,

the underlying subject of the imperative sentence is

‘understood’ as second person ‘you’. According to Agbedo

(2000:118) , the term imperativasation is derived from

imperative. This means that a sentence of this kind is

used to make request or issue order, command or give

directives. The deep structure of imperative construction

is stated thus:

16 NP Modal Verb X

[ you] [ will] V X

The surface structure of imperative is generated by

deleting the designated constituents ‘you’ and ‘will’:

NP Modal Verb

[you] [will] V

49

50

The deletion of the category symbols in the imperative

does not bring about a change in the meaning ( Agbedo

2000:123)

According to Wurff (2007:1) studying imperative clauses

within the generative framework should, in principle, be a

rewarding undertaking. This is because such clauses

instantiate various phenomena, which directly relate to

some of the core concerns that generative inquiry has

addressed over the years’. In English imperatives, for

example, we come across main clause with empty subjects,

case-marked subjects in the absence of a verb overtly

showing tense or agreement, empty objects with definite

reference, do -support in negative and emphatic clauses

even when the verb is be or auxiliary have , variable

positioning of subjects (with a strong preference for

subject-auxiliary inversion in negative clauses) and in

certain dialectal varieties systematic inversion of the

subject and the lexical verb (whose pronominal object can

separate it from the subject). However, imperatives have a

further property that is somewhat disconcerting.

Specifically, the imperative verb tends to be a form that

is ‘unmarked or minimally marked’ (Palmer 1986:29).

Schmerling (1982) & Zeijlstra (2004) concerted with

the view by saying that imperative clauses in generative

grammar syntactic analysis reveals the absence of a

subject in imperatives to be only apparent. It is argued

that, at a more abstract level, the subject is you, which

at some point is (optionally) deleted. Its presence leaves

50

51

traces in syntactic phenomena like Reflexivization.

Anagbogu et al (2010:177) also show that reflexivisation

is litmus test to prove that “you” is the pronoun that is

elided in the imperative sentence deletion. These

structural configurations indicate that there are elements

at the deep structure that are deleted at the surface

structure. This kind of transformation brings about

imperative deletion (Moon 2001).

Similarly, the idea of abstract representation of

imperative clauses contains not only a subject but also a

(modal) auxiliary will, which is deleted at the surface

structure level. Since this would account for the future

time reference of imperatives and for the fact that

sentences like:

(17i) You will give back the money you have stolen

The structure can be called per-emptory declaratives or

function as directives.

The assumption of an underlying you and will also seemed to

yield the prospect of assimilating tag questions following

imperatives, as in (18), to tag questions in declaratives:

18 (i) Stop it, will you?

(ii) You will not mind, will you? (Wurff 2007:23)

Wurff further notes that argumentation reflects the early

generative concern to establish that language is full of

so-far unnoticed syntactic phenomena that are rule

governed and susceptible to analysis in terms of

underlying phrase markers that get converted into surface

structures by means of transformational operations. The

51

52

time of publication of Chomsky’s Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,

as the nature of the relevant operations and the relations

between them became the focus of inquiry. An important

question is whether imperatives obey the principle that

transformations and do not change meaning. Thus, the

postulation of an underlying will in certain sentences makes

the analysis inapplicable to languages in which the

imperative has a form that is distinct from the infinitive

one (Wurff 2007).

2.3.1.2 Dative Deletion

According to Anagbogu et al (2010), dative movement is

the interchange of position between the direct and the

indirect object. The movement does not entail any change

in the logical function of any of the arguments. This kind

of movement also involves deletion of certain items. In

English syntax, it is worthy to note that after the

movement of the indirect object, the preposition ‘for’ is

deleted. The dative movement rule is within the domain of

the verb phrase. However, inflectional languages do have

the dative movement rule. For example the deletion can be

seen as prepositional in the sense that deletion occurs on

prepositions i.e ‘for’, ‘to’,

19.(i) Give the money to me

(ii) Give me the money

Ray & Culicover (2002:23) posit two well-known

transformational relationships as the shifts of indirect

object with to and for. They illustrate this as follow:

20 i. Bill gave a book to Mary

52

53

ii Bill gave Mary a book

iii Bill bought a book for Mary

iv Bill bought Mary a book

X - V – NP – to – NP – Y

1 2 3 4 5 6

Bill gave a book to Mary/ Bill bought a book for Mary

1 - 2 - 5 - 3 - θ - θ 6

Bill gave Mary a book/Bill bought Mary a book

To further explain the differences between the two

processes in dative movement, Fillmore (1965) posits two

similar dative movement rules, one of which applies to to-

indirect objects, and the other which applies to ‘for’.

According to him, constraints imposed by the hearer’s

perceptual strategy for interpreting sentences play a

part in the unacceptability of certain constructions.

These constraints are used to account for the some

anomalies in the dative shift paradigms.

The general transformational solution for the

indirect object shift is for the purpose of exposition.

Ray & Culicover (2002) observe that the underlying order

of objects is direct-indirect and that the dative

movement rules permute to the objects and delete the

preposition of the indirect object. The alternative is

that, the opposite order holds in deep structure, and the

preposition is inserted, or not deleted just in case the

permutation of objects takes place. This is also

essentially compatible with structure arguments. Ray &

Culicover (2002:245) further made some evidence that to

53

54

and for are present in the deep structure and sometimes

setdeleted (not inserted) by the dative movement

transformations.

2.3.1.3 Deletion under the Condition of Identity

Deletion under the condition of identity deals basically

with repeated elements especially in conjoined sentences.

Linguistic economy demands that repeated elements should

be deleted leaving their heads. There are two types of

deletion under this condition: NP-deletion and VP

deletion. It is a syntactic operation in transformational

grammars that delete one of the identical nouns or verb

phrases.

According to infopleaseonlinedictionary (1997), equi

NP deletion is a rule of transformational grammar that

deletes the underlying subject of a complement clause if

it is co-referential with the subject or object of the

main clause.For example

21. John promised to (John) return money.

The underlying subject (John) of return has been deleted,

this is called equi. According to Anagbogu et al (2010),

Equi NP deletion requires the duplicated NP to be deleted.

According to Ndimele (1999) “Equi NP deletion operates

under identity of phonetic matrix’ and ‘sense anaphora

this means that the NP which is to be deleted must have

the same pronunciation and meaning in terms of referring

to the identity with another NP elsewhere in the same

sentence (Ndimele 1999:205)

54

55

According to Ndimele (1999), the later version of TGG

that argued in favour of Equi NP has been abandoned. He

stressed that the absence of an overt NP in the subject

position of an infinitival clause is seen in the form of

Control. In this postulation, it has been claimed that in

every control construction, the second of the two

identical NPs that required semantic interpretation is no

longer present. The second aspect of the deletion of

identical item is refers as Equi VP deletion. This

operates within the domain of compound sentences.

2.3.1.4 Relativisation

This is a transformation that turns a full- fledged

sentence into a subordinate clause such that it becomes a

modifier of an NP in the matrix sentence. According to

Agbedo (2003), the embedded sentence is the relative

clause which is introduced variously by such relative

pronouns as who, whose , which ,where , when, that, e.t.c

depending on the semantic properties of NP being

relativised. The argument is that, relativization

transformational process involves deletion. In essence,

the two NPs that are co-referential are involved in what

is called Equi NP deletion. The deletion in this sense is

applied under the condition of co re-ferentiality. This

involves movement rule that applies to yield the input

structure for the Equi- NP deletion rule to apply.

22. [The man [that man came here] is my friend]

So Si Si

So

55

56

+

Who

the man that man came here is my friend. (Agbedo

2000:119)

Ndimele (1999: 197) represents two types of relative

clauses; restrictive and non restrictive. A restrictive

relative clause is the type of clause which is needed for

the proper identification of the referent of the NP that

it modifies, while the non-restrictive clause is that

which merely adds further information about the NP that it

modifies, without being required for its identification.

2.3.1.5 Deletion under the Condition of Indefiniteness

This is the deletion of designated items in the deep

structure because such items are indefinite. It is

therefore permissible only when the NP Agent is

indefinite. Accordingly, the deletion of such an NP does

not alter the meaning of the sentence. (Agbedo:2000),

(Anagbogu et al 2010).

2.3.1.6 Conjunction Reduction

According to Trash (1993) cited in Ndimele (1999),

Conjunction reduction is an obligatory syntactic

operation. In classical TGG, the “conjoined sentences are

identical apart from one constituent. Each constituent is

reduced by coordination that distinguishes them.

Conjunction reduction is a type of Equi deletion which

allows deletion to occur under identity of phonetic matrix

and sense anaphora. In a number of recent studies of

coordination, different principles of reduction have been

56

57

proposed to account for reduced coordination of different

types. Jackendoff (1970), Ross (1967b) and Schane (1966)

observe that the rule needs to account for reduced

coordination. An account of coordination requires that

there is only a single principle for the reduction of

coordinate sentences. Andreas (1971) observes that a

proper treatment of coordination reduction can be achieved

only by means of a theory that allows unordered rules.

Ross (1967a) claims that reduced coordination’s

derived by the deletions of an identical verb must be

accounted for by one rule, while gapping is a rule that

reduces coordinate sentence simply by deleting identical

occurrences of verbs. Conjunctions Reduction, on the other

hand, is a rule that reduces coordinate sentences by:

(i) raising an identical constituent, (ii) deleting all

lower identical repetitions of the same constituents

to yield an A- over- A structure

Andreas (1971) further states that the only difference

between these two rules is that while gapping deletes

only verbs without a regrouping of constituents

conjunction, reduction deletes any grammatical category

including verbs with a regrouping of constituents.

2.3.1.7 Affix Hopping

Affix hopping is a type of morphophonemic

transformation that takes place to facilitate the

production of linguistic constructions and make the

inflection forms take their appropriate positions. He

further explains that, affix hopping does not hop over two

57

58

lexical items at a time. In the standard model of TGG, the

expanding AUX node is as follows:

Aux – tense (modal)) (have+en) (be+-ing)

Ndimele (1999:180) notes that tenses are not only the

first item under AUX, but also the only obligatory

constituent of AUX. This means that every sentence

contains a verb in the past or non past tense. “The

transformation, which places the bound morpheme is

dominated by the AUX node on the verb in what is known as

Affix Hopping or Flip Flop rule” Accordingly, the rule

establishes that every bound morpheme dominated by the Aux

node in the deep structure must be placed on the verb at

the relevant position at the surface structure. This shows

that bound morpheme and the flip verb changes positions.

‘Affix –Hopping rule correctly predicts the

behaviour of verbs in a sentence. By means of affix

hopping transformation, the auxiliary verb have is

followed by be which preceded the main verb. Also the

tense are attached to the verbs. (Ndimele 1999:180)

2.3.2 Adjunction Transformation

Adjunction involves the addition or insertion of

some constituent in the process of transforming a sentence

into another form. The idea behind transformation is that

the insertion does not add any structural information.

Adjunction transformations are as follows:

2.4.2.1 Extraposition

This is an optional syntactic operation whereby a

sentential subject is moved to occur as the complement of

58

59

an embedded clause. Ndimele (1999) explicates that the

original position of the subject is filled by dummy or

pleneostic it. He further notes that the sentential

subject is a clause- like construction which functions as

the subject of a sentence. Culiver & Jakendoff (1997)

consider extraposition as the syntactic tests. It is the

subject- object asymmetry of attachment sites. This means

that the phrase is extraposed from object as attached to

VP while phrase is extraposed from subject as attached to

VP or IP.

While from the perspective of minimalist syntax,

extraposition is taken to be an optional operation.

Chomsky (1995:146) argues that “choice points will be

allowable only if the resulting derivations are all

minimal cost”. This is not the case here, once derivation

indicates that an extra movement operation has taken

place.

Koster (2000) identifies more problems in classical

approach to extraposition. For instance, the source of

extraposition can be deeply embedded even in contexts

where regular leftward movement is banned. Koster’s

proposal is to assume that relative clauses and PPs do not

directly complement their head NPs. Rather, they are

instances of wider grammatical notion, parallel

structures, which also include coordination.

Ndimele (1999) compares extraposition with raising.

According to him, raising is a promotion process whereby a

more deeply embedded constituent is moved into higher

59

60

clause. Meanwhile extraposition is a demotion process

whereby a constituent in a higher clause or less embedded

position is moved to a lower more embedded position on a

tree.

2.3.2.2 Do Support

In English Grammar, do-support or do-insertion refers

to the use of the auxiliary verb do in negative or

interrogative clauses that do not contain other

auxiliaries.While the English word do may also serve as a

main verb, as in

23. We do the laundry on Sundays

Wikipedia posit that, do support occurs only in the

presence of another verb serving as the main verb, as for

example in the conversion

24 (i) I go there

to either the question form

(ii) Did I go there ?

or the negative form

(iii) do not go there.

Wikipedia (2011) further explains that except in copula

sentences such as in

25. Is he here? or They are not banjo players ( except with

the main verb "have", as in Have you any bananas? or I haven't

any bananas, which are permissible in some but not all

dialects). In English almost all questions and almost all

sentences with negative polarity feature an auxiliary

verb. Questions and negative sentences that do not include

a modal auxiliary or a form of have or be include a form

60

61

of do. This auxiliary do is inflected for person, number

and tense, and may be contracted with not so the latter

becomes n't, as in don't, doesn't and didn't. In questions and

negatives, the auxiliary do has no meaning in itself, so

it is sometimes called a dummy auxiliary.

According to Akmajian & Frank (1999) “ Do” can be seen

as an obligatory member of an auxilliary given that all

other members of the aux. (except tense) are optional in a

proposal, it is therefore possible to generate base form

such as:

Fig 2

Since Fig. 2 is a possible strucure, Akmajian and Frankn

(1999:138) stress that the ‘do’ insertion in a grammar can

equally generate an ill formed syntactic structure. This

further explains how the ‘do’ insertion brings about

incorrect predictions. In an assumption that do support has

only one rule deleting do, it has the likely tendency to

generate ungrammatical sentence.

2.3.2.3 There – Insertion

The insertion of “there” in a sentence is done when the

subject of the sentence is not marked by an definite

61

Tns V

S

NP VPAux

Adj

He pres

do noisybe

62

article. According to Akmajian and Frank (1999), there is

an existential there and locative there. There are several

differences between the two uses. First of all, the

sentences with existential there and those with locative

there answer different kinds of questions. However

transformational analysis results in insetion of “there”

In response to the example (a) ‘yes there is a boy on

the dock’. It is noticed that the locative ‘there’ is some

what stressed in speech, as existential there is

unstressed. The fact that it is the word that really

answers the question posed in (b) indicating a direction

of location. Likewise, the stress on existential ‘there’

may well be related to the fact that it carries little or

no meaning. (Akmajian & Frank 1999:234) .However “there”

in this case is inserted only when the subject of a

structure is modified by an indefinite article as in:

26. (i) A boy is in this room

(ii) There is a boy in this room

The insertion of “there” is made possible as a result of

the indefinite structure in example 26(i).

2.3.2.4 Focus and Topicalisation

The topicalisation and focusing are a twin

transformational levels that places emphasis on certain

elements. This kind of transformation move element from

the predicate position to the position of the subject that

emphasises the topic or focus as the case may be.

(Anagbogu et al 2010)

62

63

In a nutshell, for deletion and insertion

transformations (- and +) to take place, there is a

movement transformation. Movement as a type of

transformation is a syntactic process that moves a piece

of structure within the tree, giving rise to displacement

situations where a word or constituent appears in some

position other than the initially position. Movement

process includes; Affix Hopping, Question formation,

dative deletion movement, topicalisation and focusing and

passivisation.

Passivisation does not occur in most tonal languages,

rather is takes the form of focusing and topicalising. A

passive sentence is that which the patient (i.e an entity

that feels the impact of the verb) occurs as the subject

of the sentence, while the agent or force i.e the entity

that initiates the action that affects the object)

optionally occurs as the complement of a by preposition at

the end of the sentence. The passive rule is an optional

transformational operation which relates an active

sentence to its passive one (Ndimele 1999:190). In other

words, the passive and question rules have the effect of

restructing trees, both reorder portions of their input

trees and in addition, the passive rule adds the

structural elements by and been. (Wikipedia 2011)

Affix hopping that often results in deletion is argued

to be the last transformation in a syntactic string. It

takes place after all the transformations have occurred.

While the question formation moves the entire question

63

64

form to the end of the tag question. Movement of indirect

object of a sentence to come before the direct object of

the verb is termed dative movement.

2.4 Relationship between Move Alpha and Adjunction/

Substitution

Substitution is the type of transformation that

replaces existing constituents to a new part within a

syntactic structure. For instance, substitution occurs

through the process of pronominalisation,

reflexivization .For instance, Pronominalisation is a

process of turning a noun, noun phrase or nominal element

into a pronoun, while reflexivisation is a subpart of

pronominalzation. In this case, Akmajian (1996) asserts

that the likely rule to make use of syntactic features

that involve agreement between elements in English is

reflexivization. According to him, reflexive pronouns have

a limited distribution. A reflexive can never function as

the subject of a sentence. Even in non subject position,

the distribution of reflexives is restricted. In nutshell

it must agree with the subject of the sentence.

A typical transformation in TG is the operation of

subject-auxilliary inversion (SAI). This rule takes as its

input in a declarative sentence with an auxiliary, for

example:

17. a "John has eaten all the heirloom tomatoes."

b "Has John eaten all the heirloom tomatoes?"

64

65

With the transformation of the sentence, the declarative

contruction in (a) becomes an interrogative structure in

(b) through the operation of SAI process.

In the original formulation, Chomsky (1957) posits that

these following rules were given as rules that held over

strings of either terminals or constituent symbols or

both.

X → NP − AUX − Y X → AUX− NP− Y

(where NP = Noun Phrase and AUX = Auxiliary)

Considering the Extended Standard Theory, in the work of

Emonds (1982) on structure preservation, transformations

are viewed as holding over trees. The government and

binding theory in the late 1980s posits transformations as

no longer structure changing operations at all, instead

they add information to already existing trees by copying

constituents.

The earliest conceptions of transformations were that

they were construction-specific devices. For example,

transformation turns active sentences into passive ones. A

different transformation raised embedded subjects into

main clause subject position in sentences such as

18 "John seems to have gone"

The structure has a third reorder arguments in the dative

alternation. With the shift from rules to principles and

constraints, these construction specific transformations

morphed into general rules (all the examples just

mentioned being instances of NP movement), which

65

66

eventually changed into the single general rule of move

alpha.

According to Wikipedia (2011), Transformations actually

come of two types: (i) the post-deep structure kind

mentioned above, which are string or structure changing,

and (ii) generalised transformations (GTs). Generalised

transformations proposed in the earliest forms of

generative grammar (e.g., Chomsky 1957). They take small

structures, either atomic or generated by other rules, and

combine them. For example, the generalised transformation

of embedding would take the kernel

19. "Dave said X" and the kernel "Dan likes smoking" and

combine them into "Dave said Dan likes smoking."

According to Chomsky (1995) cited on Wikipedia (2011), GTs

are structure building rather than structure changing. He

further posits that in the Extended Standard Theory and

government and binding theory, GT made way for recursive

phrase structure rules. However, they are still present in

tree-adjoining grammar as the substitution and adjunction

operations and they have recently re-emerged in mainstream

generative grammar in minimalism as the operations merge

and move (Chomsky 1995).

2.5 Empirical Studies

Iormba (1988) studied Tiv class of sentences and

observed that the syntactic arrangement of the language

operates in SVO pattern (subject, verb, object ). In the

similar approach, Shima (1988) investigated Tiv noun class

and grouped them under countable and uncountable basis.

66

67

However, both studies centred within the tenet of

structural grammar.

Anagbogu et al (2010) in the study of deletion

transformation in Igbo observe that deletion involve the

elimination of certain constituents from the deep

structure. In Igbo syntax, deletion is found within the

domain of imperativisation, Equi-VP deletion, Equi-NP

deletion, deletion under the condition of indefiniteness

and affix hopping. Since Igbo and Tiv are tonal languages,

most of the domain or levels observed are similar to this

study, however, the pattern of deletion of indefinite

element differs. Another area of difference is the way

affix hopping operates.

Stockwell, Bowen and Martin (1965: 230–231) in their

study of the imperatives in Spanish and English observed

that recent developments have transformed will-deletion

into a serious analysis of the infinitival imperatives

attested in various languages. It is therefore not

necessary to agree with Bosque (1980: 417), who claims

that the ‘will-deletion rule’ is ‘a possibility that makes

little sense in any language other than English. According

to him, the deletion at this level results into imperative

construction. For instance

20. (i) You will get out

(ii) Get out

Anagbogu et al (2010: 178) demonstrated imperative

process through the use of tag question formation and

reflexivisation which proves that ‘you”’and ‘will’ are

67

68

deleted in order to form an imperative construction. They

also demonstrate this transformation in Igbo imperative

construction:

21. Ị ga- abịa – you (sg) will come

Deep Structure: NP Modal V

1 2

3

Surface structure 0 0 3

In the above illustrations ‘abịa’ is a verb with a prefix

necessitated by the presence of the modal auxiliary. The

deletion of the auxiliary leaves the prefix stranded. It

has no antecedent to liase with the verb. According to T-

rule application, this brings about the deletion of the

prefix. The structural change therefore takes the form

“bia”. The studies on imperatives will- deletion in Spanish

and English, as way as Igbo further attests that syntactic

transformation of syntactic constructions in languages

takes certain degree of variation.

Craign (1977) studied the infinitival complement

sentence in Jalcetek, he observed that the rule of Equi-

NP deletion deletes the subject of an embedded clause

leaving the verb uninflected for person and suffixed with

the irrealised suffix. He further observed that the

structure of Jacaltec sentence deletes the subject NP in

an embedded clause under co- referentiality with either

the subject or the object of main clause. In his study,

two types of Equi NP deletion are found in Jacaltek

syntax; the infinitival complement sentence and the

68

69

subject case / case of backward equi NP deletion. He

observed it is the subject of the embedded verb that

triggers the deletion of the main verb.

Ellen (1990) in an empirical argument demonstrates

that numerous transformations including equi VP and equi

NP deletions are sometimes observe not to obey coordinate

structure constraint .This means that super NP as way as

VP and sluicing do not obey certain constraints. Erics

(1976) in the study of English verbal morphology and

ellipsis or deletion noted that the deletion of identical

verbs in a particular structure usually provides room for

the deletion of identical NPs, this notion is similar to

most languages. For examples

(22) a, I went to the market to buy yam, I went to the

market to buy books

and I went to the market to buy fish

b, I went to the market to buy yam, books and

fish

The transformational analysis in the above structures

indicates how the deletion of VP can result in the

deletion of certain NPs evident in example (22a).

In many European languages, relative clauses are

introduced by a special class of pronouns called relative

pronouns. In other languages, relative clauses may be

marked in different ways: they may be introduced by a

special class of conjunctions as relatives. The main verb

of the relative clause may appear in a special

morphological variant or a relative clause may be

69

70

indicated by word order alone. In some languages, more

than one of these mechanisms may be possible. A relative

clause is always used to join together two sentences that

share one of their arguments. For example, the sentence

(23) The man that I saw yesterday went home

is equivalent to the following two sentences: "The man

went home” ,“ I saw the man yesterday." In this case, "the

man" occurs as argument to both sentences. In other words,

there is no requirement that the shared argument fulfil in

the same role in both of the joined sentences. Indeed, in

this example, "the man" is subject of the first, but

direct object of the second. The two sentences joined in a

relative-clause construction are known as the main clause

or matrix clause (the outer clause) and the embedded

clause or relative clause (the inner clause). The shared

noun as it occurs in the main clause is termed the head

noun. Languages differ in many ways in how relative

clauses are expressed: How the role of the shared noun

phrase is indicated in the embedded clause and how the two

clauses are joined together.

When the embedded clause is placed as relative to the

head noun, the process of indicating which noun phrase is

the main clause is modified. (Riemsdijk and Williams

1986).

. Riemsdijk and Williams (1986) in the investigation

of affix hopping observed differences in English pattern

from other languages. For example;

(24) a. Aux – (m) (have ten) (be+ing)

70

71

b. Affix hopping

x – Affix – V- Y

Deep structure 1 2 3 4

1 0 3 +2 4

( where affix = ten, ing, V =V, M = the inflection of –

s which indicate the type of tense. In English, -s can hop

over a verb to agree with the subject noun.

Affix Hopping is evident in both deletion and movement

transformations. Anagbogu et al (2010) demonstrates its

pattern in Igbo syntactic structures and observed that

affix hopping is more pronounced in the past and

perfective constructions. According to Emenanjo (1978),

Igbo affixes are extensional because they extend the

meaning of either of the root or stem. Angbagogn et al

(2010:188) further pointed out that Igbo verbs are more

inflectional than English. For example;

25. Ngọzi bịara.

The verb structure result from the thus:

X . Past V

DS 1 2

S S O 2x1

Mbah (2011) observes that in some Igbo construction types,

the affix is entirely deleted so that at the surface

structure there is a zero morpheme. He further observed

that affix hopping in Igbo is limited to verb.However,

affix hopping does not operate in the same way as it does

in either English or Igbo.

71

72

Anagbogu et al (2010) proved in Igbo that,

extraposition transformation is commonest with noun

clauses. In this way, noun clauses are complement

sentences which can function in the position of noun

phrases. In their study of Igbo extraposition, they

observed a likely pattern that is applicable in English.

i.e

The noun clause is na – clause

(26) Na ọ biaghi were m iwe

According to the analysis, the italicised noun clauses

could be extraposed from the noun clauses to the

predicate. This transformation brings about the insertion

of pleonastic ‘it’

that she/he come not annoy past me

“that she/he did not come annoyed me”.

na m ahụ ghi ya gwụrụ m ike

that I see not him/he finish past I strength

“that I did not see him/her made me weary”

Kaltenbock (2004) carried out a study in English

extraposed vs non extrasposed clauses and noted that it is

the subject of the structure and its functional properties

that get extraposed or not. For instance, the illustration

that

27. “John went to London vs John went to London”

The main emphasis is put on the differences of it –

extraposition and non-extraposition in their discursive

function. Kaltenbock further observes that, the

72

73

exchangeability of such two structures is a product of

generative linguistics.

Studies carried out shows that adjunction also occur

when there is a transformation of a syntactic structure.

Ayegba (2010) examines adjunction transformation in Igala

syntax and observes that extraposition centres mostly on

noun clauses or complement sentences that it functions in

position of noun phrases. For example

28 a. Kì i mágbà n bé mi eju -

that she /he collect not annoy past me

Ì be mi eju ki i mágbà

it annoyed me that she/he did not collect it

In Tiv, extraposition manifest on noun clauses with the

“er- clause” which takes a simple rule with the subject

extraposition from one of the more regular ordering:

subject +predicate+ subject.

According to Ayegba (2010) there insertion in Igala takes

insertion of ‘ Ì chéne’ indicating when the subject is

not mark by a definite article This kind of insertion

occurs when the subject of a sentence is not marked by a

definite article. For examples:

29 .(a) Óje dé efù uchíbu fufu –

food be inside plate white the

the food is inside the white plate

(b) Ì chéne Óje ki dé efu uchibu fufu lè

There is food inside the white

plate.

73

74

Anagbogu, et al (2010) also illustrated this in Igbo

syntactic structures:

30 (i). nwata no n’ ulo

Child be in house

a child is in the house

(ii). o nwere nwata no n’ ulo

there is a child in the house

Ayegba (2010) further observed that there in Igala is

shown by compressed expression “I chene” which serve as

reminder and reduces the original sentence to a

subordinate one.

31 i.Ojone a wa

Ojone be coming

ii. Ojone comes or is coming

Ìchéne Ójone kì dwa

There is one Ojone who will come”

The above studies on there insertion differs in some form of

operation from the present study. There is distinction

between animate and inanimate in Tiv indefinite

constructions.

From Igala adjunction, passivisation is not applicable.

Anagbogu, et al (2010) also observed that passive

transformation is not possible in Igbo syntax rather it

could be in form of focusing and topicalisation process.

The observations that do-support is not obtainable in

Igala and Igbo, rather tone function in this aspect.

Therefore we can conclude from the available literature

that do- insertion is not common in tonal languages. In

74

75

Tiv, yes/no question brings about insertion of a tense

marker and inflection of a suffix on the verb.

2.6 Summary of the Review

The available literature reviewed in this work posits

that the general principles governing the operation of the

transformational component of a grammar have always been

one of the central issues in the theory of syntax. In an

overview of the concept of “generative grammar”, it is

clear that every language correctly predict which

combination of words that can form grammatical sentences.

Yule (1997) asserts that, the set of explicit rules in

language is what is termed Generative .TGG developed from

the shortcomings of finite state grammar and phrase

structure grammar (PSG). Acoording to Robin (2004) TGG is

best handled by looking at the three major concepts:

‘transformation, ‘generative’ and ‘grammar. These concepts

explain how structures are generated from a particular

surface structure and offer explanation. In each sentence

in a language, there are two levels of representations;

the deep structure and surface structure. The deep

structure operates for the purpose of semantic

interpretation while surface structure operates on by

phonology for the purpose of phonetic interpretation.

Several models or versions of TGG emerged between the

times of its introduction. (i.e standard theory, Extended

standard theory, revised extended standard theory). In

75

76

spite of the modifications and revisions, the literature

proved that the models are relatively the same.

The aim of the work is to relate the general claim

from both theoretical and empirical studies that

transformation does not change meaning .However this will

be ascertain in an effort to see how structures in Tiv

language are generated and reveal their underlying

structures. The study examined deletion and adjunction on

a general perspective by reviewing their possible levels

across languages. On the other hand, we see the interplay

between substitutions, adjunction to the principle of move

alpha.

In the course of the empirical studies, we examined

the studies carried out in Igala, Igbo, Jacaltek, English

and other European languages. In relation to Tiv studies

on syntax, we reviewed the available studies on Tiv

syntax. In general, no empirical literature indicated

where a study has been carried out using two specific

types of transformation on Tiv. Since TGG remains the root

to other models of syntactic theories, the study of

deletion and adjunction in Tiv syntax using TGG approach

is necessary to fill in the literature gap in Tiv

language.

76

77

CHAPTER THREE

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

3.0 Preamble

In this chapter, emphasis is on the analysis of data

collated in the Tiv language. Since our study focuses on

deletion and adjunction transformations, the chapter is

divided into two major sections: the first section treats

deletion transformation in Tiv syntactic structures while

the second aspect discusses insertion or adjunction

transformation.

3.1 Deletion Transformation in Tiv Syntax

Deletion is a type of transformation which removes

elements that were originally present at the base

generation stage so that such elements do not appear at

the surface structure level. Deletion occurs when there is

a transformation. The deletion transformation which we are

going to discuss include: imperativisation, equi-NP

77

78

deletion, equi-VP deletion, deletion under the condition

of indefiniteness, affix hopping and relativisation

3.1.1 Imperativisation

Imperative structures request or give order,

therefore, when the base structure is transformed, certain

elements that were originally at the deep structure level

get deleted at the level of surface structure. At this

point, we can examine this kind of transformational rule

in Tiv syntactic constructions.

32. Deep structure: Ù vá cii zwa wou

You will shut up mouth your

You will shut up your mouth

Surface structure: cii zwa wou .(shut up mouth

your)

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the pronoun (u) : ù vá cii zwa wou

Deletion of the modal auxilliary (va) : vá cii zwa

(wou)

Optional deletion of the possessive pronoun (wou): cíi

zwa wou

NP Modal V NP Pro

DS ù vá cii zwa wou

1 2 3 4 5

SS Ø Ø 3 4 Ø

- - cíi zwa Ø

SS/SC: cíi zwa

Shut up mouth

78

79

Shut up

The deletion of the second person pronoun ‘u’ and the

modal auxiliary verb ‘va’ enables the verb to take the

appropriate form for the imperative structure. It further

results in an optional deletion of the possessive pronoun

‘wou’. It is optional because the possessive pronoun can

equally stand (grammatically appropriate) despite the

deletion of the subject pronoun and the modal verb.

Notably, the possessive pronoun gets elided without a

significant change in the original meaning of the

structure. However, with the deletion, the structure

appears in a more commanding form given to the pitch in

tone.

33. DS: ù vá wùhé yolyol ker

you will lock yourself inside

SS: wùhe yolyol ker

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the Subject Pronoun (u): ù vá wùhé

yolyol ker

Deletion of the modal verb (va): vá wùhé yolyol ker

NP Modal V Refl Prep

DS ù vá wùhé yolyol ker

1 2 3 4 5

SC Ø Ø 3 4 5

Ø Ø wùhé yolyol ker

SC: wuhwe yolyol kér

lock yourself inside

79

80

In example 33, the reflexive pronoun “yólyol” is the

litmus test which justifies that it is the subject

(pronoun) that gets deleted to form an imperative

structure. The reflexive pronoun “yólyol” refers to the

subject of the structure. With the deletion of the subject

pronoun and the modal verb, the structure appears in an

imperative form.

34.DS: ù vá temà ána

you will sit with him

SS: témà ána

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the pronoun (u) : ù vá temà ána

Deletion of the modal verb (vá): ù vá temà ána

Deletion of the conjunction (a): témà ána

NP Modal V PP

DS ù vá temà ána

1 2 3 4

SS Ø Ø témà

ána

SS: téma-na

Sit him

Sit with him (request)

The deletion of the subject and the modal verb renders

the preposition that is embedded in the pronoun (i.e ‘ana’

-with him/her) stranded, especially in a rapid speech.With

the deletion or assimilation of the preposition, the

structure takes imperative form as in “téma ná” instead of

“téma ána”.

80

81

35: SD : né va yevèsé

They (pl) will run

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the plural pronoun (né): né va yèvése

Deletion of modal verb (vá): vá yèvése

NP Modal V

DS né va yèvése

1 2 3

SC Ø Ø 3

Ө Ө

yévese

SC: yévese

Run

Just like English, the second person singular and plural

in Tiv take a similar form. The pronoun ‘ne’ (you) stands

for both second persons singular and plural respectively.

The transformation of the structure results in the

deletion of the subject of the sentence (second person

plural ‘né) and the modal verb ‘vá’. From the analysis,

there is a change in tone of the second syllable of the

main verb “yévèsè” from low-high-high (LHH) to high-high-

high (HHH). The HHH tone change makes the structure

imperative.

3.1.2 Equi-NP Deletion

In Equi noun phrase deletion rule, one or more NPs’

are grammatically superior.The NP within get deleted when

81

82

they is identical with the grammatically superior NP

within the same structure. This kind of deletion is an

optional one. In Tiv syntactic constructions, this pattern

of deletion is possible. For examples;

36. SD: Jíghjigh man Mùlé ka mbàyév mba Waya

Jíghjígh and Mule are children of Waya

DS: Jíghjigh ka wàn ú Waya màn Mulé ka wàn ú Waya

Jighjigh is child of Waya and Mule is child of

Waya

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the copula verb (Ka): Jíghjigh ka wàn ú Waya

màn Mulé ka wàn ú Waya Jighjigh is child of Waya and Mule

is child of Waya

Deletion of the NPs (wan): Jighjigh wàn ú Waya màn Mulé

ka wàn ú Waya

Deletion of the preposition (u): Jighjigh u Waya man Mule

Waya ka wan u Waya

Deletion of the NP1 (Waya): Jighjigh Waya man Mule Waya

ka wan u Waya

Deletion of NP2 (Waya): Jighjigh man Mule Waya ka wan u

Waya

Morphophonemic trans. (wan to mbayev): Jighjigh man Mule

ka mbayev Waya

Jighjigh and Mule are children Waya

Jighjigh and Mule are children of Waya

Sentence concord: Jighjigh man Mule ka mbayev mba Waya

SC: Jíghjígh man Mule ka mbayev mba Waya

Jíghjígh and Mule are children of Waya

82

83

Jighjigh and Mule are children of Waya

The deletion of the copula verb ‘ka’ nececisited the

deletion of the singular form of the noun ‘wán’, the

preposition ‘u’ and the repeated NP “Wáya “.We further

observe that the NP2 “wan” in the structure takes a

morphonemic transformation. This means that, the singular

form of the noun ‘wan’ (child) takes its plural form

‘mbayev’ (children). In relation to the plurality of the

subject of the structure, the grammatical unit “u” changes

in a way that gives the subject and the verb a structural

agreement pattern. SC=DS=TRANSFORMATION=SD=SC

37. SS: M zá hùlá sule màn gbénda ù kér

DS: M yèm kén sule, m za hùlá sule shì m zá hùlà

gbenda ù kén sùlé

I went to farm, I go (pst) weed farm and I weed

pathway

I went to cleared the farm and the pathway to the

farm

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the equi subject pronoun (m): M yém ken sule

M zá hùlá sule shi M zá hùlá gbenda u kèn súle

Deletion of the Verb (yém): yém sule m zá hùlá sule shi

zá hula gbenda u kèn sule

Del of the prep (kèn): ken sule M za hula sule shi zá

hùlá gbenda u ken sule

Deletion of the equi NP1 (sule): sule m zá hùlá sule shi

zá hùlá gbenda u sule\

83

84

Deletion of the verb (za): m za hula sue shi za hula

gbenda u ken sule Deletion of the verb (hula): m za hula

shi hula gbenda u sule

Substitution of the NP2: (sule): M za hula sule man

gbenda u ker

SC: M zá hùlá sule màn gbénda ù kér

I go (pst) weed farm and road (pst) in side [ I have

cleared the weed in the farm and its pathway]

There are three possible phrases in the construction.

The first person pronoun ‘M’ get repeated as the subject

in the entire phrase structures, while the verb ‘hula’ and

the noun ‘sule’ also takes identical occurence . Meanwhile

the transformation results in the deletion of the subject

pronoun “M” at the first and third phrase structures.

Equally the deletion of the subject pronoun makes it

possible for the deletion of the the preposition ‘ken’,

the verb ‘yem’ and the repeated NP ‘súle’.This also

resulted in the deletion of the past tense ‘zá’ and the

verb ‘hùlá’. To avoid repetition, the NP “súle” in the

object position changes the pronoun ‘kér’.

. In addition, we observe that the conjunction “shi’ takes

a morphophonemic transformation to “man” for an

appropriate grammatical form. SD (DS) =TRANSFORMATION=

SS=DS=SS=SC

38.SC: Mwùésé màn Térfa ve soo àyóleve

Mwuese and Terfa they love themselves

Mwuese and Terfa love themselves

DS: Mwùése soo Terfa mán Térfa kpaà sóo Mwuèse

84

85

Mwuese love Terfa and Terfa too loves Mwuese

Transformational Analysis:

Del. of the equi NP ( Térfa ) Mwùése soo Terfa màn Térfa

kpaa soo Mwùése

Deletion of the VP (soo): Mwùése soo màn Térfa kpaa soo

Mwùése

Deletion of the adverb (kpaa): Mwùése màn Térfa Kpaa soo

Mwùése

Sentence harmony: Mwùése màn Terfa ve soo Mwùése

Mwuese and Terfa they love Mwuese

Mwuese and Terfa love Mwuese

Sub.of NP2 for refl. (Mwuese to ayoleve) Mwùése màn Térfa

ve soo àyóleve

Sentence concord: Mwùése màn Térfa ve soo àyóleve

SC: Mwùése màn Térfa ve soo àyóleve

Mwuese and Terfa they love themselves

Mwuese and Terfa love themselves

Mwuese and Terfa says they love themselves

In deleting the Equi NPs in the underlying

structures, the third person plural pronoun “vé” and the

plural reflexive “àyóleve” occur by insertion and

substitution. On the other hand, the two possible

underlying structures gets coordinated by the conjunction

“man”. It therefore means that the deletion of the

identical noun “Térfa” renders the structure ungrammatical

and floating. This further results in the deletion of the

VP1 “sóo” on the ground of it equivalence with the VP2. In

addition, the adverb “kpaa” gets elided and allows way for

85

86

the insertion of the plural pronoun as way the

substitution of the NP2 and the reflexive plural form. In

a way to have the structural agreement and concord, the

deletion of the NP invariably made it possible for the

insertion and substitution to occur.

3.1.3 Equi-VP Deletion

This is another instance of deletion that illustrates

the fact that transformations are meaning preserving. The

Equi-VP deletion operates within the domain of compound

sentences. It is the transformation which involves the

deletion of a verb or a verb phrase because it is

identical with another verb with which is compounded in

the same sentence. In Tiv syntax, deletion also occurs at

the level of equi-VP.

(39) SD Fánèn mán Doofan vè yám chahul màn mkúrem

Fanen and Doofan they [pl./pst tns] buy soap and cream

Fanen and Doofan bought soap and cream

DS: Fánèn yám chahul shi Fanen yam mkurem màn Dóofan yam

chahul shi Doofan yam mkurem

Fanen bought soap also Fanen bought cream and Doofan

bought soap also Doofan bought cream

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the equi VP (yam): Fánén yam chahul shi Fanen

yám mkurem màn Doofan yam chahul shi yam mkurem

Deletion of the NP (chahul): Fanen chahul shi Fanen yam

mkurem man Doofan yam chahul shi yam mkurem

86

87

Deletion of conjunction (shi): Fanen shi yam mkurem man

Doofan yam chahul shi yam mkurem

Deletion of the NP (Fanen): Fanen Fanen yam mkurem man

Doofan yam chahul shi Doofan yam mkurem

Deletion of the equi Verb (yám): Fanen yam mkurem man

Doofan yam Chahul shi Mkurem

Deletion of the NP (mkurem): Fanen mkurem man Doofan yam

chahul shi yam mkurem

Deletion of equi VP (yam):Fanen man Doofan yam chahul shi

Doofan yam mkurem

Deletion of equi NP (Doofan): Fanen man Doofan yam chahul

shi Doofan mkurem Morphophonemic transformation (shi):

Fánén màn Dóofan yam chahul màn mkúrem

Tense agreement (ve): Fánén man Doofan ve yam chahul man

mkurem

SC: Fánén màn Dóofan ve yam chahul màn mkúrem

Fanen and Doofan [pst] buy chahul and cream

In example (39), the verb phrase transformation results

in the deletion of both the VP and NPs that appears within

the domain of the compound sentence. For instance, the

identical position of the phrases in the structure overtly

renders the deletion of the VP “yám” (bought).The

transformation further allows for the deletion of the

repeated subject NPs and the object of the structure (i.e

Fanen, Doofan, chahul, mkurem). The deletion of the VPs

and NPs called for the morphophonemic transformation of

“shi”. With the deletion and substitution, the structure

takes an appropriate concord.

87

88

On the other hand, the plural form “ve” marks the

plurality of the subject and also indicates the past form

of the verb ÿam” in the structure.

40. SD: TórTív ngù yílan we shì TórTiv ngu yílan kuma

king Tiv is calling you also is calling kuma

Paramount ruler of Tiv is calling you and Kuma

DS: Tór Tiv ngù yílan we shì Tór Tiv ngù yílan Kumà

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the aux. (ngù): Tór Tiv ngu yilan we shi

Tor Tiv ngu yilan Kuma

Deletion of the VP (yilan): Tor Tiv ngu yilan we shi

Tor Tiv yilan Kuma

Substitution of the Conjunction (shi): Tor Tiv ngu

yilan we man Kuma

SC : Tor Tiv ngu yilan we man kuma

Tor Tiv is calling you and kuma

The above illustration further shows how identical verbs

can result in equi. NP.The deletion of the identical verbs

renders the NP2 “Tór Tiv” hanging. The stranded contituent

subsequently get deleted. In a stepwise transformational

analysis, there are two possible syntactic constructions

linked with the conjunction “shi”.Therefore, the deletion

of the auxilliary ‘ngù” and the verb “yilan” occur because

of their identity.

In Tiv syntax, it is however permissive to jointly

make use of the conjunction ‘man’ and ‘shi’ to serve as

an adverb for a peculiar grammatical expression. For

example “Tór Tív ngù yílan we màn shí Kuma- [TorTiv is calling you and also

88

89

Kuma”] in this case, the “shi” occurs as an adverb in the

grammatical structure.This illustration further proves

that ‘shi’ and ‘man’ are interchangeably used in Tiv

syntactic constructions. However, ‘shi’ sometimes function

as an adverb when preceded by a verb or a conjunction in a

particular construction.

41.SD :Ayába màn álogo ka àkáayan

Plantain and cassava are food

DS: Ayaba ka kwàghyán man Alogo ka kwàghyán

Plantain is food and cassava is food

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the verb (ká): áyaba ka kwàghyán màn

álogo ka kwàghyán

Deletion of the NP (kwàghyán): áyaba kwàghyán màn

alogo ka kwàghyán

Concord: Ayába màn álogo ka àkáayan

SD=SC: Ayába màn álogo ka àkáayan

Plantain and cassava is are- foods

Plantain and cassava are food

The phrase ‘Ká kwàghyán” gets repeated in the structure.

In most cases, the process of equi VP deletion often

results in the deletion of the NP. The deletion of the

identical verb results into deletion of the NP “kwaghyan”

which occurs as the singular form of “akaayan” (foods). It

is clear that the deletion of the NP1 made way for the

sentence harmony. The harmony is based on the fact that,

the subject and object/complement (So) must agree inorder

to make the structure grammatically appropriate. Notably,

89

90

tone placement on the verb “ka” changes from low to high

at the stage where the NP “kwaghyan” takes its plural

form.

3.1.3 Deletion Under the Condition of Indefiniteness

This is a deletion of certain linguistic items at the

deep structure under the condition of its indefiniteness.

In this type of deletion, an indefinite proform is

deleted, the pronoun is usually ‘there’ in English. In a

syntactic construction, all infinitive clauses have some

subjects which are deleted because such subjects are

indefinite. In Tiv, this kind of deletion takes the

following dimension:

42. SD: kwágh er ìshú ngi shìn mngérem mèlá

Something-like fish is inside water that

There is fish inside that water

DS: Kwágh er ìshu ngi shín mngérem mèlá

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the pronoun (kwágh): kwágh er ishú ngi

shìn mgérem mèlá

Deletion of the preposition (ér): ér ìshù ngi shìn

mgérem mèlá

SC: Ishú ngí shín mngérem mèlá

Fish is inside water that

The fish is inside that water

The pronoun “kwágh” and the preposition “ér” made the

structure not to appear in a definite form. The deletion

of the indefinite consituent allows the structure in a

90

91

definite form. In Tiv language, this form of indefinite

element is applicable in a subject noun that is inanimate.

Tiv syntax shows that, an indefinite constituent can also

take a conjoin form instead of appearing as a separate

grammatical element in a structure.

43 SD: Màkwágh er msorum ka mà yúa ù mán

Anything like alcohol is always bitter to drink

Something alchohol is always bitter to drink

DS: màkwágh er msórum ka mà yúá ù mán

Transformational Analysis:

Del. of the ind. pronoun (màkwágh): màkwágh er msorum ka

mà yúa ù mán

Deletion of the preposition (er): er msorum ka ma yua u

man

SC: Msórum ka mà yúa ù mán

Alcohol is always bitter to drink

Alcohol is always bitter to drink

In Tiv syntactic structure, indefinite proform takes a

different morphological pattern depending on the

constituents of the syntactic arrangement. In the previous

illustrations, the indefinite structure occurs by the

conjoined use of the pronoun and the preposition. In this

case, the pronoun “kwágh” occurs with another indefinite

unit “mà” i.e màkwágh”. The structural inclusion of the

preposition “ër” gives the structure an indefinite form.

The transformational analysis gets the indefinite unit

deleted leaving the structure in a definite form.

44. SD: Màór er Swàndé ngù kén yough la

91

92

Someone like Swande is inside house that

Someone like Swande is inside that house

DS: (i) ór ngu ken yough la

Someone is inside house hat

Someone is inside that house

(ii) Or er Swàndé ngù kén yough la

Person like Swande is inside house that

Someone Swande is inside that house

(iii) Màór er Swàndé ngù kén yough la

Someone like Swande is inside house that

Someone like Swande is inside that house

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the pronoun (màór): màór er Swande ngu

ken yough la

Deletion the preposition (er): er Swande ngu ken

yough la

SC: Swàndé ngù kén yough la

Swande is inside house that

Swande is inside that house

The pronoun “màór” and the preposition “ér” also posit the

structure in an indefinite position. The deletion of the

proform “màór” renders the preposition floating. In order

for the structure to take a definite form, the preposition

gets deleted. From the analysis, the indefinite form in

(iii) shows that, deletion of the indefinite contituent

“ma or er” invariably puts the structure in a definte

perspective. From the illustration, the contituent ‘or”

indicates that the subject noun is human.

92

93

3.1.4 Affix Hopping

Affix hopping is a process whereby inflectional affixes

are positioned after appropriate verbs in readiness for

their combining together through the application of

appropriate morphonemic rules.

X affix V

Y

Deep Structure 1 2 3

4

Surface structure 1 0 3

4

45. DS: Térfa ayà chinkáfa

Terfa should eat rice (assertion)

SS: Terfa yá chinkáfa

Terfa ate rice

Transformational Analysis

Affix hopping (a): Terfa ya past chinkafa

Deletion of Affix (a) Terfa yá chinkafa

The transformation indicates that affix hopping in Tiv

is rather peculiar. A past tense occurs when a verb is

marked with a contrasting Tone. In example 45, the verb

“ya” in low tone indicates it present form.when the tone

changes to high, it clearly appears in the past form. The

prefix “a” can also function as a pronoun where the

subject noun of the phrase gets elided. Affix hopping

therefore results in the deletion of the prefix leaving

the structure in past form. To some extent, this study

93

94

questioned whether affix actually operates in Tiv rather

tone demonstrates the affix rule.

3.1.5 Relativisation

A relative clause is a subordinate clause that

qualifies a noun phrase. It also qualifies a pronoun or a

noun phrase which already contains a modifier.

Relativisation is therefore a process of reducing full

sentence forms into relative clauses. Relative clauses may

expand into full sentence. In Tiv syntax, relativisation

transformation can bring about the deletion of identical

NPs in a construction. For examples:

46. SD: Mwúese ù álu nyian la àvé ìmóngo henTernèngé

Mwuese who is fair that come pst visit to Ternenge

Mwuese who is fair in complexion came to visit

Ternenge

DS: Mwúese ù álu nyian la, Mwùése àvé ìmóngo

henTernèngé

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of NP2 (Mwuese): Mwúese ù álu nyian la

Mwuese àvé ìmóngo

hen Ternènge

SC: Mwúese ù álu nyian la àvé ìmóngo

Mwuese who is fair that she came visit to Ternenge

Mwuese who is fair came to visit Ternenge

There are two clauses in the structure level. i.e the

main and subordinate clauses. The relative clause

otherwise called subordinate depends on the main clause in

order to make a complete thought. The relative clause

94

95

“Mwúese ù álu nyian la” qualifies the NP “Mwùése ave

ìmóngo hen Ternenge”. In other words, the second clause

brings about the deletion of the identical NP2 “Mwuese”

47 .SC: Ónyinye ù átav tsembelee ken àtó u mbayev

màkéranta la hèmbá àyém

Onyinye who tall very in among them student school

that won race

The Onyinye who is very tall among the students the

man won the race

DS: Ónyinye ù átav tsembelee ken àtó u mbayev

màkéranta la Onyinye

hèmbá àyém

Onyinye who is-tall very in among them that man that

won race

Onyinye who is very tall among the students that

Onyinye won the race

Transformational Analysis:

Deletion of the NP2 (Onyinye): Ónyinye ù átav

tsembelee ken àtó ù mbáyev

màkéranta la Onyinye hèmbá àyém

Deletion of the dem. Pron (la): Ónyinye ù átav

tsembelee ken àtó u mbayev

màkéranta la hèmbá àyém

Man who tall very in among them children school that

that won race

The man who is very tall among the students the man

won the race

95

96

SC:Ónyinye ù átav tsembelee ken àtó u mbayev màkéranta la

hèmbá àyém

Onyinye who tall very in among them student school

that won race

The Onyinye who is very tall among the students won

a race

Since relativisation entails reducing full sentence form

into relative clause or expanding relative clause into a

full sentence. In this case, the relative clause expands

into a full sentence thereby deleting the identical NP.

The main clause “Onyinye hèmbá ayem” (Onyinye won a race)

with its subordinate “Onyinye ù átav tsembelee ken ato ù

mbáyev màkérata la” shows an identical occurrence of the

NP “Onyinye”. By extension, the transformation rule gets

the identical NP2 in the main clause deleted. This also

allows for the deletion of the demonstrative pronoun “lá”

which occurs in the main clause.

In examples 46 and 47 above, transformation under this

process resulted in the deleton of identical NPs in either

of the clauses. For instance, the identical NPs like

‘Mwuese’ and “Onyinye” in the respective subordinate

clauses further proves the earlier syntactic claim.

3.2 Adjunction Transformation in Tiv Syntax

Adjunction is a transformational process that adds

elements to a sentence while such a sentence is being

transformed into another syntactic form. In Tiv,

adjunction can occur at the levels of extraposition,

96

97

(there) kwagh/or er- insertion, Yes/No question, focusing

and topicalisation and reflexivisation.

3.2.1 Extraposition

This transformation is common with noun clauses.

However, some syntactic structures result from

topicalising and focusing of the themes of noun clauses.

In English, this process will bring about the reappearance

of ‘it” when it is coreferential with a noun clause. In

Tiv syntax, a similar pattern is obtainable. A simple rule

for deriving a sentence with subject extraposition from

one of the more regular ordering is: Subject+ predicate+

subject

Let illustrate this process in Tiv syntactic

constructions. The noun clause is the er- clause.

48. SD: ér a vende ìyúa yam yo víhìm

that he/she rejected gift so my pains- me much

that he/she rejected my gift pains me

SS: ì víhìm ér a vende ìyúa yam yo

It pains -me that he past reject gift my

Transformational Analysis:

Extraposition of the noun clause: vihim er a vende iyua

yam yo

insertion of pleonastic (i): I vihim er a vende iyua yam

yo

SD=SC: ì víhìm ér a vende ìyúa yam yo

The transformation of the above structure indicates how

the verb moves to function in the subject position. In

the extraposition of the of verb clause, an insertion of

97

98

the pleonastic “i” occurs at the initial position.

Secondly the verb “vihim” with an enclitic pronoun “m”

makes it possible for the insertion.

49. SD: ér Jíghjígh àvé je ka kwagh u dedóó

Since Jighjigh come pst here so thing this good

that Jighjigh came here is a good thing

DS: ká kwaghyo dedòo ér Jighjigh àvé heèn yó

It some thing that Jighjigh +he come past here so

It a good that Jighjigh came here

Transformational Analysis:

Extraposition of the compl: ká kwagh u dedòo ér

Jighjigh àvé heèn yó

Insertion of the adverb (héèn): ká kwagh u dedòo ér

Jighjigh àvé heèn yó

The extraposition of the adjective to the position of

emphasis has optionally permits for insertion of an adverb

which describes the position of the verb “ave”. However,

the insertion of the adverb at deep structure level is

totally optional. This means that the extrapositioning of

the constituents via transformation can equally occur

without such insertion. The modal aux “a” gets

extraposed from the initial position to appear as

pleonastic unit at the surface structure.

3.2.2 There “kwágh er/ór er’’ Insertion

In Tiv, the indefinite unit “kwagh er [or] or er” get

inserted in an appropriate position when a sentence is not

marked by a definite subject. In Tiv, “there”takes an

98

99

insertion of indefinite constituent ‘Kwágh [or] ór’ with

either the preposition [er] on either of the units.

50.SD: kwágh er chínkáfa ngì shín gbade ù púrpur

Something like rice is inside plate the white

there is some rice inside the white plate

DS: chínkafa ngì shín gbade ù púrpur

rice is inside plate that white

the rice is inside the white plate

Transformational Analysis:

“Kwágh” insertion: kwágh chínkáfa ngì shín gbade ù

púrpur

“er’ insertion: kwágh er chínkáfa ngì shín gbade ù

púrpur

SC: kwágh er chínkáfa ngì shín gbade ù púrpur

Some thing like rice is inside plate the white

there is rice inside the white plate

The insertion of the pronoun with the preposition

gives the structure an indefinite position. The”kwágh er”

insertion drives a partial change in the original meaning

as evident in the deep structure. The subject of the

structure is made specific where the underlying structures

are drived .The insertion of “kwágh ër” made the subject

of the syntactic structure non- specific.

51.SD: Bèm nguer yévese felè féle

Bem runs very fast

SS: òr ér Bèm nguer yévese felè féle

Someone like Bem always run fast fast

There is one Bem that runs very fast

99

100

Transformational Analysis:

“or” insertion : òr Bèm nguer yévese felè féle

“er” insertion : òr ér Bem nguer yevese fele fele

SC: òr ér Bèm nguer yévese felè féle

In Tiv, ‘there’ insertion takes the indefinite pronoun

and a preposition as in “kwagh er” [or] ‘or er’ depending

on the subject of the structure. In the transformed

structure in 50, the ‘kwágh er’ gets inserted where the

subject refers to inanimate, while in example (51), the

indefinite unit occurs as ‘òr er’which takes a different

structurally form because the subject denotes human being.

In this regard, the rule states that where ever kwágh’/or

occur at the initial position with the preposition ‘ér’,

the domain of structure automatically changes to an

indefinite pattern.

3.2.3 Yes/ No Question in Tiv (Do- insertion)

Do insertion is not obtainable in Tiv. Yes –No

question is the type whose expected answer is either ‘yes’

or’ no’. In English language, such questions can be formed

in both positive and negative forms. The formation of

yes/no questions varied in languages. In Tiv, the question

formation brings about insertion of tense marker and the

repetition of the final vowel. For examples:

52. SC: shén vè gbídyée

did they play? ( insertion of question formula =

shen +sub+ verb and an /e/ vowel)

DS: vé gbídyé

100

101

They play

Transformational Analysis:

Insertion of past tense (shén): shén ve gbidye

Insertion of interrogative marker (e): shén ve gbidyee

SC: shén vè gbídyéé? did they play? (insertion of

question = shen +sub+ verb and an /e/ vowel)

Insertion in this case usually occur when a statement

changes into interrogative.The question structure requires

a yes/no answer. To realise the question tag, the

transformation of the subject plural pronoun structure

into an interrogative form brings about insertion of a

past tense unit “shen” and the appropriate repetition of

the vowel sound “ï” In a nutshell, the transformational

analysis gets the structure back to the original

structural description. As in (shen) +sub+verb+e

53. SC : shén ve vaa ( shen + sub + verb and an /a/ vowel)

had they past come

had they came?

DS: vè vá

they (pst) come

they came

Transformational Analysis:

Insertion of pst tense (shen): shén ve và

Insertion of interrogative marker (a): shén ve vàá

DS=SC : shén vé váá? ( shen + sub + verb and an /a/ vowel)

had they past come

had they came?

101

102

Transformational analysis in example (53) also inserts the

past tense “shén” and extends the final vowel on the verb

which drives the question structure.The transformation of

the statement into the yes/no question actually generates

the additions.

3.2.3 Reflexivisation

Tiv takes morphologically marked reflexives that

structurally defined the local antecedent. For instance,

the reflexives ‘yól’ and ‘àyól refers to the singular and

plural markers of a pronominal subject. Reflexive markers

often occur where the object is the referent of the

pronoun subject and stand for the

same person or thing in any of the three grammatical

persons below:

1st person singular 2nd person Sg 3rd person Sg

mò /m wé/ nè ùn/

wén/ ná

I you

him or her

1st person plural 2nd person pl 3rd

person pl

sé nè

vé

102

103

we you

them

54.SD: Tárhòm wúá ìyó la

Tarhom, kill past snake that

Tarhom killed that snake

DS: Tárhòm wúa ìyó la yol na

Tarhom pst kill snake that self him

Tarhom killed that sake himself

Transformational analysis:

Insertion of the singular reflexive marker (yol ):

Tárhòm wúa ìyó la yol

Tarhom pst kill snake that self

Tarhom killed that snake self

Insertion of the 3Sg (ná): Tárhòm wúa ìyó la yol na

Tarhom pst kill snake that self him

Tarhom killed that snake himself

SD: Tarhom wua iyo la yol na=SC

SC: Tárhòm wúa ìyó la

Tarhom pst kill snake that

Tarhom killed that snake

The subject NP “Tárhom” is the antecedent of the reflexive

pronoun “yolna”. In process of transformating the

structure, the third person pronoun gets inserted along

the singular form marker. The third person singular

precedes the reflexive marker. There is no gender

distinction in the Tiv language rather the use of person

depends on the subject of the structure.

55.SD: Gódo màn Térhemèn vé hùlá sule

103

104

Godo and Terhemen they weed farm

Godo and Terhemen weed the farm themselves

DS: Gódo màn Térhemèn vé hùlá sule àyól ave

Godo and Terhemen they weed farm them selves

Godo and Terhemen weed the farm themselves

Transformational Analysis:

Insertion of the Plural refl. Marker (ayol): Gódo màn

Térhemèn vé hùlá sule àyól

Insertion of the Pron. (ave): Gódo màn Térhemèn vé hùlá

sule àyól àvé

Transformational analysis shows that the reflexive

pronoun in example 55 occurs in a plural form because of

the plurality of the subject NP. It therefore means that

an insertion of the third person plural ‘àyólave’

(themselves)’is the reflexive of the subject NP “Gódo màn

Térhemèn”. The insertion of the reflexive does not affect

the original meaning rather it specify the action

performed by the subject NP.

3.2.5 Focusing and Topicalisation

This is a level of adjunction transformation that

emphasises or shows the point of Prominence when a

structure is transformed. This transformation takes a

similar Pattern like passivisation .However, in Tiv, it is

derived mostly from interrogative or declarative

constructions. The syntactic transformation often brings

about addition of certain units at the surface structure.

56.SC. Akov nè ká Terwase à yá mèm ér

shoes this is Terwase that pst buy me

104

105

it is Terwase that bought this shoes for me

DS: [Terwase ya me Akov] transformed [Akov ne ka Terwase a

ya mem er]

[Terwase bought me shoes][Shoes this is Terwase

that bought me]

[Terwse bought shoes for me] [This shoes is Terwase

that bought for me]

Transformational Analysis:

Movement of the object to subject [Akov ne ka Terwase a

ya mem er]

Shoes this is Terwase that bought me

This my shoes was bought for me by Terwase

Insertion of the dem. Pronoun (ne): Akov ne ka Terwase

a ya mem

Insertion of the declarative tag (er) Akov neka Terwase

a ya mem er

SC: Akov ne ka Terwase a ya mem er

In transforming the structure, the object moves to the

subject position which gives it the point of emphasis and

assigns the role of topic in the structure. In Tiv, the

constituent “er” at the structural analysis appears as

neutral pronoun and indicates the structure in a

declarative perspective.

57.SD:Térfa kenge or

Terfa past look somebody

Terfa looked at somebody

DS: [kaan or Terfa a kengee] transformed [Terfa kenge

or]

105

106

[which person Terfa is looking] [Terfa pst

look someone]

[who is Terfa looking at] [Terfa looked at

someone]

Transformational Analysis:

Movement of the object to subject position: kaan or

Terfa a kengee

Insertion of the interrogative marker (ka): ka or

Terfa kenge

Insertion of the pronoun (a): ka or Terfa a kenge

SC: káan or Térfá á kèngée

The focus shifted from the subject “Terfa” to the object

through transformation. The structure therefore changes to

interrogative form through the insertion of both ‘kaan’

and the pronoun “a” .

CHAPTER FOUR

106

107

Summary of Findings, Recommendation and

Conclusion

4.1 Summary of the Findings

The study looked at Tiv transformational syntax with

analyses of deletion (-) and adjunction (+) and how their

transformational levels account for and generate syntactic

structures. Based on the focus, deletion transformation in

Tiv includes imperativisation, equi NP and VP deletions,

deletion under the condition of idefiniteness,

relativisation and affix hopping. While adjunction in Tiv

has been identified at the levels of extraposition, “kwagh

er/or er” insertion, reflexivisation, focusing and

topicalisation.

The findings reveals that tone assigns imperative

role in Tiv syntactic constructions as illustrated in

example (34). The verb “yevese” (run) with the high-high-

high tone placement marks an imperative form while the

low- high-high tone indicated it as a statement. Through

this study, it has been observed that equi NP and VP

deletions operate within the domain of compound sentence.

The deletion of an identical VP in syntactic structure

often resulted in an equi NP deletion. The study

identified that “shi” and ‘man” are interchangeably used

in Tiv syntax as linking words. Transformation showed that

“shi” in the context of complex sentence operates as an

adverb rather than conjunction.

107

108

To further investigate deletion pattern in Tiv, the

study ascertained that indefinite proform in Tiv takes a

peculiar dimension. There are parametric variations of

indefinite item(s) in which the subject of the structure

detect the proform to use. [i.e “hanma’, “makwagh er,

“kwagh er” maor er”] under the condition of indefiniteness

shares some internal siminarities with the {there} Kwagh er

/or er insertion in Tiv. The use of “kwagh er” reffered to

the subject inanimate while the “or/maor er” is associated

with the animate subject. The study also revealed that

certain lexical items in Tiv create ambiquity thereby

extending the semantic of a syntactic structure. It is

also observed that deletion at the level of affix hopping

extends the meaning of the root verb and changes tone

placement. It means that tone marked distinction in tense.

At the level of relativisation, it is only the equi NP

that get deleted through transformation.

In the second section of the analysis, we examined

how adjunction operates in Tiv syntax. At this stage,

certain non contituents at the initial stage gets inserted

during transformation. The yes/no question performed a

similar role like do insertion. The study observed that

transformation resulted in insertion tense and the

repetition of the final vowel on the root verb which

marked the structureon. The study also discovered that

focusing and topicalisation in Tiv derived insertion

mostly from transformational interrogative or declarative

constructions.

108

109

4.2 Contribution of the Study

Transformational generative syntax is filled with

questions whether transformation is meaning preserving or

not. The study has attempted to answer some of these

questions through application of TGG in Tiv syntactic

structures. Through this study, it has been established

that exterior appeareance of Tiv sentence may vary when

transformed. However, the transformed structure is

logically related to the initial structure. Another

contribution of the study is that the stepwise analyses

revealed the regular and irregular forms of Tiv

structurally components and resolved the ambiquious level

of certain structures. This study tries to fill the wide

gap existing in Tiv Syntax.

4.2 Recommendations

The need to study syntax of a language cannot be over

emphasied. An advanced literature existing in any language

most termed from the grammar of such language. This work

therefore recommends for further studies in Tiv syntax

using the syntactic theories. Most importantly, efforts

should be made by government to encourage the study of the

Tiv language in order to promote its indegenous status and

upgrade it as a subject for examination bodies in Nigeria.

4.3 Conclusion

109

110

The objectives of the study were in two-folds:

(1) to analyse the pattern of deletion and adjunction

transformations in Tiv

Syntax.

(2) to differentiate between deletion and adjunction

transformation in Tiv

syntax.

Through the five research questions drawn to investigate

the research problem of this study, the following

conclusions are arrived at:

First, deletion operates in Tiv transformation at

the levels of imperitivization, equi NP equi VP,deletion

under the condition of indefiniteness, relativisation,

affix hopping focus and topicalisation.While adjunction

transformation operates at the levels of extraposition,

there insertion, yes/no question and reflexivisation. This

answers the research questions thereby establishing that

there are peculiar patterns of occurrence of deletion and

adjunction in Tiv. Second conclusion is that meaning is

preserved despite the deletion and insertion of certain

linguistics items. However, alternation in tone extends

the meaning of some structurally components.the study also

observed that adjunction transformation often results into

deletion.

The work reinforced the need to explore Tiv syntax

within the syntactic theories. It also filled the gap in

the empirical research material for intending scholars in

Tiv syntax and will serve as a guide to researchers in

110

111

other languages on the similar field. In other words, it

is of immense benefit to the researchers in Tiv syntax and

semantics. They will find it important in the study of the

interface between form and meaning. The results

established a solution bases on the issue of ambiguity and

ungrammaticality in certain Tiv constructions.

References

Agbedo, C.N (2000). General Linguistics: An Introductory Reader:

Enugu:

ACE Resources Konsult

Akmajian, A. (1996). On WH- Movement: In Formal Syntax.

(Eds.) P.

Culicover & T. Wasow PP.71-133. New York: Academic

Press

Anagbogu, P.N., Mbah, B.M. and Eme, C.A (2010). Introduction

to Linguistics:

Awka: Amaka Dreams Ltd.

111

112

Ayegba, M. (2010). Adjunction in Igala: A Transformatinal

Analysis. A

Postgraduate Seminar Presented in the Department

of Linguistics, Igbo

and other Nigeria Languages. University of

Nigeria, Nsukka.

Baker, C.I (1978). Introduction to Generative Transformational

Syntax.

New Jersey: Prentice-HalleEagle Wood Cliffs

Bosque J. (1980). Wil- Deletion. Holland: Foris

Publication

Chomsky , N. (1957) Syntactic Structures. Hague: Mouton

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge:

MIT Press

Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Binding and Government.

Dordrecht: Foris

Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge: MIT

Press.

Culver, S.G. (2007). Direct Object in Persian

Culiver, P.W. and Jenkendoff, R. (1997). Semantic

Subordination Despite

112

113

Syntactic Coordination. Linguistic Inquiry Vol.2

pp122-145

Crystal, D. (1971). Linguistics. London: Routledge

Craig ( 1977). Infinitival Comlement in Jakaltek. In W.D. Dois,I.O.

Kump &

W.J. Asheby. Preferred Argument Structure: Grammar

as Architecture for

Function.New Jersy: John Benjamins Publishing

Company

Emenanjo, N. (974). Elements of Modern Igbo Grammar. Ibadan:

Oxford Press

Emonds, J.E (1970). Evidence that Indirect Object Movement is a

Structure

Processing Preserving Role. Cambridge: MIT Press

Emonds, J. ( 1976). A Transformational Approach to English

Syntax. New

York:Academic Press

Eric, P. (1976). English Verbal Morphology and VP Ellipsis .in

Kusmoto (eds)

The Proceedings of the Meeting of North East

Linguistic Society. Pp 54-75

113

114

Fowler, R. (1971). An Introduction to Transformational Syntax.

London:

Greenberg, J.H. (1966). Universals of Language. Cambridge:

M.I.T Press

Kaltenbock, G. (2004). It –Extraposition and Non Extraposition in

English.

Austria: Ranmuller

,Kean, M. L. (1975). “A Theory of Markedness in Generative

Grammar”

Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT. Distributed by

the Indiana

University Linguistics Club.

Kin, J. B. and Ivan, S. (2005). “Object Extraposition: A

Constraint Based

Approach”. A Paper Presented in the 41st Chicago

Linguistics Society.

12/08/2005

Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. London:

Cambridge

University Press

114

115

Mbah, B.M. (2011). GB Syntax: A Minimalist Theory and Application to

Igbo:

Enugu: Catholic Institute for Development

Justice and Peace Press

Ndimele, O.M. (2006). A Course in Morphology and Syntax. Enugu:

Nwala, M.A. (2004). Introduction to Linguistics: A First Course:

Abakiliki:

Wisdom Publishers

Oluikpe, B.O. (1979). Igbo Transformational Syntax. Onitsha:

Africana

Publishers Ltd

Orjime, D. (2002). Tiv Language and the Study of Syntax. Makurdi:

Oracle

Press

Quirk, R and Greenbaum, S. (1973). A University Grammar of

English.

London. Unioversity Press

Radford, A. (1981) Transformational Syntax. Cambridge:

Cambridge

University Press

115

116

Raford, A. (1992). Transformational Grammar. Great Britain:

Bath Press

Riemsdijk, H. (1978). A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness: The

Binding

Nature of Prepositional Phrases, TheNetherlands: Foris

Publications,

Riemsdijk, H. and William , E. (1986). An Introduction to the

Theory of

Grammar. Cambridge: MIT Press

Robin, N. (2004) The Structure of English. Cambridge C.U.P

Roberts, P. (1964). English Syntax. New York : New York Press

Ross, J. (1967). Constraints on Variable in Syntax. PhD Thesis MIT:

Indiana

University. Linguistics Club: Bloomington

Stockwell, R.P, Bowen J.P & Martin, J.N. (1965). The

Grammmatical

Structure of English and Spanish. Chicago:University of

Chicago Press

Jackendoff, Ray (1974). Semantic Interpretation in Generative

Grammar. MIT

Press

116

117

Trask, R.L. (2001). A Dictionary of Grammatical Terms in Linguistics:

London

: Roultlege Press.

Udu, T.T. (2009). Tiv :A Reference Book. Kaduna: Labari

Publishers

Welmers, W.E. (1973). African Language Structures: Los Angeles:

University

of California Press.

Waya, D.T. (2010). “Deletion Transformation in Tiv”. A

Postgraduate Seminar

Paper Presented to the Department of Lingustics,

Igbo and Other Nigerian

Langauges, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

Yule, G. (2002) The Study of Language: An Introduction. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press

Zeijlstra (2004).

Internet Sources

Abraham, R.C. (2009). Tiv Grammar.wikipedia, the free

Encyclpedia. Retrieved

12/07/2011

117

118

Bosque, I. D. (1980). Imperative Clauses in Generative Grammar.

Wikipedia,

the Free Encyclpedia. Retrieved 12/07/2011

Erilbaum, L. (1999). Descriptive Linguistics Structure

Grammar

.www.wisegeik.com.Retrieved on 12/07/2011

Giosue, V. (2005). Deep Structure and Surface Structure.

www.vitaglione.it/giosue.com.Retrieved on

13/05/2011

Craig, R. (1977). Grammatical Relations in Ergative Langauges.

www.linguistics Buffalo.com Retrieved on 12/12/2011

Jeremy, R. (2002). Grammar . Wikipedia the free

enclypedia.www.wikipedia.org. 22/05/2011

Iormba, A. (1984). The Tiv Syntax.

www.wowa.edu/internet/unijos/department

Retrieved on 15/11/2011

Rini,K. (2007). A Generative Grammar.

www.ekayati.blogspot.com. Retrieved

11/06/2011

Shim, Sarah (1988). Noun Classes in Tiv

118

119

www.wowa.edu/internet/unijos/department. Retrived on

15/11/2011

Infopleaseonlinedictionary. www.infoplease.com. Retrieved

on 11/12/2011

Schane N. & Ritchie, R.E.(1973). On the Generative Power

Transformational

Grammars Wikipedia, the free Ecycloedia. Rtrieved on

23/11/2011

Wurff, W. (2007). Imperative in Generative Grammar

119